Hacker News Reader

Comment by rnd33 | Hacker News Reader

Completely agree. AI is very impressive in many ways but there is something deeply wrong that is hard to put into words. The output is probable but never true, if that makes sense.

I think this is also the mechanism behind why AI generated videos and images are so captivating at first. I remember when Midjourney first launched and it was hours and hours of a brain-melting "Wooooooow". But once you get used to it and start to identify the patterns the brain quickly labels most AI-generated content as blank space.

If the image or text wasn't created by a human, then there was no intent behind the content, there is no message or novel information conveyed, and it reads as noise.

View on HN

Yeah AI generated content hints that there is a whole world behind it, the way that an image pre-AI was a clue that there was a rich 3D space that corresponded to the image.

It seems our brains are adapting to that and recognizing "actually the signal behind this message is quite sparse" even when presented with rich imagery.

> If the image or text wasn't created by a human, then there was no intent behind the content, there is no message or novel information conveyed, and it reads as noise.

If I were to push you a bit on this, when is it not true?

Let's not like at AI specifically, but can you think of other examples? Like for me, I think of: the creation of earth itself, or stars, or even DNA.

> But once you get used to it and start to identify the patterns the brain quickly labels most AI-generated content as blank space.

I guess the majority of people do low-effort generation that doesn't perturb a default style of a network enough, so it stays blatantly noticeable. The percentage of "super-recognizers" who notice almost all AI-generated images is around 1-2%. It could be that you are one of them, of course.

I think this is the confirmation bias trap a lot of people fall into; higher quality, hard to detect AI is already ubiquitous but because it's hard to detect people just don't clock it.

"I can accurately detect 100% of AI generated images that I recognise as being AI", if you will.

This is true, and doesn't even get into low-effort generation (and the 'perturbing') slightly disguised and then no one sees it at all.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com