Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by ur-whale | Hacker News Reader

Full thread

ur-whale

Programming can be art.

And I totally resonate with the pleasure of crafting code and the artistic aspect of it.

However, it is not just that, and when it comes to making a living, then the story changes.

And for that second part, man is AI a killer tool.

And I'll add,: even for the first part, the story isn't black and white.

If you use AI very carefully and in a collaborative manner, meaning not for the "creative writing" part, but for the "looking over your shoulder part" and "making suggestions" part.

View on HN

> However, it is not just that, and when it comes to making a living, then the story changes.

Isn't this the case with all art?

There are many commercial artist that are putting some of their creative input to the side to make something that sells. That doesn't stop it from being art.

There are photographers that in their daily lives make school pictures or journalistic picutres while they may be more interested in making artistic pictures.

The same used to be for painters (a lot of the great painters actually) used to mostly make portraits or commission pieces to order, not to their taste.

Same goes for writers, videographers and other arts.

I think a key difference is that most programming careers, the artistic outlet (code) is not what is being sold to customers. The customer might feel something if the app works fast, but they won't feel anything about the fun bit packing and struct-of-array design you did for personal enjoyment

Sure but most day to day professional photos are not shot because the subject is so interesting or the composition is so intriguing. They are shot to accompany a flyer, sell a product or to give a grandchild picture to their grandparents, or to get a picture on your drivers license. Even though the photographer uses a lot of techniques and knowledge to frame their shots and get a good picture, artistic values that is often not the function.

> Programming can be art.

On that at least we agree (ignoring the rubbish about "AI", unless it describes an artificial intelligence with at least peer-level (i. e. human-level) agency, and not a language model). The same goes for the ridiculous, but for chatbot lovers certainly convenient, notion that art stops being art because money (or some other form of compensation) changed hands. That's just a reheated version of the tosh incompetents threw at artists since time immemorial. I remember the last time when it was very en vogue: the pathetic "anti-art" movements of the 90s.

And programming? Processes and their manifestations, depending on definitions of course, can indeed be art. Just like writing and its manifestations (e. g. poems, novels).

Reply on news.ycombinator.com