Finally all spinner verbs revealed:
https://github.com/instructkr/claude-code/blob/main/src/cons...
Here's one that works (for now): https://github.com/chatgptprojects/claude-code/blob/642c7f94...
strings $(which claude) | grep 'Swirling'Instead of realistic ones like "Loading assets" and "Reading file", they would give humorous nonsensical ones like "Reticulating Splines".
It became a bit of a meme in the years since.
First it was punctuation and grammar, then linguistic coherence, and now it's tiny bits of whimsy that are falling victim to AI accusations. Good fucking grief
But AI is causing such visceral reactions that it's bleeding into other areas. People are so averse to AI they don't mind a few false positives.
If I had lost my local movie theater because of digital film, I would have a really good reason to hate the technology, even though the blame is on the studios forcing that technology on everyone.
I think principles are important. Especially when it comes to art, principle might be all we have. Going back to the crypto example, NFTs were art that real people had made. In some cases, very good art. People railed against NFTs despite the quality of the art. That is being against something on-principle. Comparatively, if my local grocery chains were owned by neonazis, I'd have a much harder time of standing on principle, giving that doing so may have a negative impact on my ability to survive and prosper.
AI Gen works, on the other hand, most often do not come with readily available marking that it is AI Gen. What people are complaining about is the lack of quality in the work. If they accuse a poorly human-written article of being AI Gen, that's just a mistake. But the general case is a legitimate evaluation of the quality of the material and the conditions under which it was made and presented.
In my own case, while I certainly have plenty of "principled" reasons to dislike AI Gen works, I also dislike it because it's just garbage. Oh yeah, sure, it's impressive that a computer can spit out reasonable content at all. It would equally be impressive for a chimpanzee to start talking in full sentences. That doesn't mean I'm going to start going to the chimpanzee for dissertations on the human condition.
> I think less of someone as a person if they send me AI slop.
there is the fact that such images 'look ai' but even if it were perfect, idk somehow i feel cheap doing that.
I myself would disagree that CGI itself is a bad thing.
I was watching some behind the scenes footage from something recently, and the thing that struck me most was just how they wouldn't bother with the location shoot now and just green-screen it all for the convenience.
Even good CGI is changing not just how films are made, but what kinds of films get shot and what kind of stories get told.
Regardless of the quality of the output, there's a creativeness in film-making that is lost as CGI gets better and cheaper to do.
that kind if stuff might work in anime or cartoons, but live action just looks ridiculous to me for the most part.
Same thing is true of AI output.
That's not the case, and hasn't been for some time, but it sounds like your mind's made up.
Apparently not, because no one but you implied that they had been.
There are prompting strategies that improve the odds greatly, but like the GGP, you've made up your mind, so it's a waste of time to argue otherwise.
If this is the case it would be observed with different prompting strategies, when you find a prompt which puts more weight on the post-training models.
The story is that I was getting into a new genre of music, namely Japanese City pop from the 1980s. I was totally unfamiliar with the genre and started listening to it on YouTube. I found one playlist, which I listened to a lot, thinking: “wow, this is very formulaic, and the lyrics are very generic” but I kind of thought that was just how the genre went. Finally had planned to use it for during a small local event, but when I went to find out who the artists were I embarrassingly found out it was all AI generated.
Thing is, in this instance I knew nothing of the source material, when I went to get actual songs, written by actual people, the difference was start. I would be able to recognize AI generated City pop in an instant now 8 months later. This experience kind of felt like I had been scammed. That my ignorance of the genre had been taken advantage of. It was not pleasant.
My dad has also started sharing with me links on Facebook to pop songs that have been re-arranged in different genres. This was a big area of fun for a number of folks in my family several years ago as we discovered YouTube artists like Chase Holfelder who put significant effort into making very high quality rearrangements. But I kept noticing these weird issues in the new songs.
I've gotten to where I can identify an AI generated song almost immediately: there's a weird, high frequency hiss in the mix that sounds like heavy noise getting to overcome compression artifacts but the source from which it's coming should be clean. There's a general lack of enthusiasm to the lyrics and a boring, nonsensical progression to the lyrics on original arrangements. Sometimes, the person generating the song tries to hide that last issue by generating instrumentals only or they use one of those try-to-hard-to-sound-badass Country Rock genres that are popular on Tik Tok to stick on top of clips from the TV show Yellowstone (WTF is with that?!), but then when I check the details, there's an obviously AI cover art for artists I've never heard of. The accounts will be anthologies full of these artists that have never existed.
So, I know people keep parroting "a good artist can use any tool". But I've yet to see it. All this "democratizing art" (didn't know anyone was gate keeping it to begin with, certainly have not seen any lack of talent online in several years) doesn't seem to be producing results. It becomes pretty obvious very quickly it's all just a pump and dump scheme to Get Them Clicks.
Obviously you think the AI content that you can identify is bad. But there is content you've encountered that you think is good and not AI content, that actually is AI generated.
That's the survivorship bias.
The difference is in the authorship. Actual work and skill goes into CGI, and people generally notice bad CGI, and it generally affects how you judge the art. Sometimes CGI is actually part of the art and you are supposed to notice it, and it is still good (think how Cher use Autotune in Do You Believe). There is no such equivalence with AI.
To further elaborate. Bad CGI is often (but not always) used as a cost-cutting means. Directors (or producers encourage directors to) use it when they want to save money on practical effects or even cover up mistakes that happened during shooting and want to avoid an expensive re-shoot. This can work OK if used sparingly and carefully, however if this is done a lot and without the needed care, you will notice it, and you will judge the work from it. AI content is kind of like that, except that is kind of all what AI is. The other couldn’t be bothered to do the work and just prompted an AI to do it for them.
To summarize: AI is not like CGI in general, it is much closer to a strict subset of CGI which only includes bad CGI.
IMO it's a combination of long-running paranoia about cost-cutting and quality, and a sort of performative allegiance to artists working in the industry.
People don't care about AI. They only care whether the product is good.
I reckon it's just drama paraded by gaming "journalists" and not much else. You will find people expressing concern on Reddit or Bluesky, but ultimately it doesn't matter.
Which of course won't be done because corporations don't want that (except Valve I guess), so blame them.
The honor system is never a sustainable solution. It's not even down to corporate greed, it's just not something that works at scale, especially when there's money to be made, and even more especially when there isn't.
Which of course won't happen because we live in reality and not fantasy where we can dream that "people should just do X"
Really interesting to see Github turn into 4chan for a minute, like GH anons rolling for trips.
certainly nothing friendly.