Hacker News Reader

Comment by zfoong | Hacker News Reader

Rather than genuinely enjoying a well-made/actually entertaining AI content, people are just gonna blindly hate on anything AI-generated.

View on HN

Until AI companies pay for all the content that they stole, I think that is a reasonable response.

Until humans pay for all the "content that they stole" and learned from, I think that is reasonable response.

AceStep XL is a music generation model trained on an open dataset. is the content generated with that one okay with you then?

What dataset? (Honest question! What's in it?)

I don't mind that ChatGPT and Claude were trained on my HN and Reddit comments.

I don't mind that Opus and Codex were trained on my code.

I don't mind that Seedance and Veo were trained on my YouTube videos.

I benefit from the models.

As they should. AI can't create art, because AI doesn't have a sense of expression.

You're right, there's always a human driving the AI to create art.

Good thing humans know how to use AI and make kick ass content with it.

AI is a tool.

Artists and engineers using AI as a tool can get further than people not using it at all.

Are you an artist by chance?

I think the cost pressures just make most AI generated stuff slop. Its not that AI can't make good stuff its that the slop to good ratio is 100s of times worse with AI published music than with human stuff. Simply because AI generation cost is essentially zero.

Purely a economic argument but also the rare good music from AI I am still looking its generally speaking not that cohesive and for unremarkable. A lot of human work is that to but the discovery of good music from people feels much less daunting

Reply on news.ycombinator.com