Spotify being listed as one of the brands doing AI right is jarring to me. It’s the only one of the companies mentioned where I’ve had multiple conversations with non tech people about how much they hate their AI usage. Specifically in their case the drift to AI produced and performed music in the playlists that are not explicitly labeled as AI. And there seems to be a nuance to what uses people are ok with, large language models for personal use, ok, generative ai in any creative capacity, offensive. Obviously anecdotal, but this article was very far from the reality I’m experiencing
Same with the 'doing AI right' Netflix example for me. Showing me the same exact recommendations in each tray but in a different order isn't helping.
Now, personally I want AI to disappear, but music is one of the few areas where AI COULD be potentially useful. The reason I say this is because for music, the criterium should be whether the music is good or bad, not who made it. I still think humans are better than AI, but there were audio tracks fully AI generated which was not bad. It does not convince me into one of those humans who fell for the skynet trap and embraced AI, but I also can not say that all of AI is totally useless - just 99.9%.
I feel that "good" music has some emotional resonance with me, at some level. In my opinion AI won't ever be able generate what I'm looking for, it always strikes me as somewhat bland or seems too much like another track.<p>Background music in distracting environments, where the listening is maybe the third or fourth thing I'm doing, maybe AI will be acceptable.
<a href="https://www.audible.ca/fr_CA/pd/What-Could-Go-Wrong-Livre-Audio/B0F4GFLBCZ" rel="nofollow">https://www.audible.ca/fr_CA/pd/What-Could-Go-Wrong-Livre-Au...</a> , this podcast (which I guess is now only available as a book) was really interesting, about 3/4 of the way through they tackle the emotional resonance bit, with one of the people from Broken Social Scene, and the artist kinda breaks down because the AI model they were experimenting with was able to replicate the "humanness" of music that loved. All in all it was a really interesting program, but the music section was probably the most fascinating.
How is this different from any other use of AI? Of course the criteria for everything should be good or bad not who made it.
> The reason I say this is because for music, the criterium should be whether the music is good or bad, not who made it<p>The first thing I do when I find a nice track is to lookup the album and the artist. I may not like all the tracks on the album, or all the albums of the artists. But the album vision and the artist motivation and skills is why an album (I listen by album) get added to my collection. That collection is meaningful for me, not for the quality of the tracks (which is fairly subjective) but the emotional resonance I have with it. Kinda like the house I grew up vs a random penthouse. An AI produce piece may be nice, but it won’t have the emotional depth to anchor it for me.
> Spotify's personalization exemplifies invisible AI done right.<p>Ironically, I can't think of a platform that does personalization <i>worse</i>. Not only does it regularly surface music I don't like, it surfaces the exact same music I don't like over and over again. I don't know whether this is bad recommendation or their pushing music on me (ie payola) but it's supremely irritating.<p>I would have thought that adding semantic search to a photos app might be a better example of good AI, not these bolted-on-top examples.
Ironic that this very article has been partially written with AI... kind of lost the drive to read it
Yep. And if you want to integrate AI into your products, like we are currently doing, you are best off just delivering features / products and concealing the fact it's "AI" instead of putting it front and centre. AI has a rather tarnished brand amongst many groups of people.
How much of that is just pattern recognition?<p>I dislike AI because the result has consistently been bad. The most enthusiastic AI co-workers are producing garbage at a 100x rate, while the non-enthusiastic responsible ones are left reading and reviewing it.
More subtle thought-out AI tends to work better than AI for the sake of it anyway. If you deliver something useful, people will end up using it. A lot of current AI use is not particularly useful though.
Remember to flag it, I've been doing this consistently with AI slopicles. Eventually we can build a social consensus around this and stop having to see them.
It's not just AI first companies..there's a place near me that tried to usr AI images in their social media ads. Completely blew up their relationship with the community. People would have preferred a cell phonr picture of their actual food to an AI generated approximation..
I've noticed this happening more and more! Mainly with restaurants! There's an indian place just down the street from my place with a menu composed of entirely (badly) AI generated curry pictures in the window. It turns everyone off eating there because it feels like they're somehow lying about what they sell. I get that curry is probably hard to photograph unprofessionally and still make it look appetizing, but I would've preferred<p><pre><code> Vindaloo [price]
[short description]
</code></pre>
over<p><pre><code> Vindaloo [price] |red curdled horror|
[emoji riddled description] |in a weird bowl |</code></pre>
"Consumers have developed pattern recognition for AI-generated content."<p>The irony of reading an article that talks about AI slop that clearly seems to have been written by AI. Hey, I could be completely wrong, and it wasn't, but there are so many flags.<p>Do I care? Not really, but whoever wrote this is right. I guess we developed a pattern recognition for these things
It sure is a silver bullet ... to end your business.
It almost feels like AI is a hype and is used by the NFT/blockchain/crypto/web3 grifters as yet another vehicle to grift people right into their graves. Fun times.
Do HN luddites realize the technology is here to stay?<p>Soon - and even now - there are people getting away with using it that you guys can’t detect.<p>Including young illustrators on Twitter with a whole audience convinced they are drawing by hand.<p>Companies will do the same. At the very least they are offloading accountability so they can do a big apology every time they are caught (they are especially doing this in AAA games).<p>People like the anti-AI HN crowd are basically forcing everyone to start lying about AI.<p>They’re gonna use it no matter what, but people will come up with all sorts of excuses how it counts as personal use or they “didn’t know” and only the honest users of it who actually disclose tools will get roasted.<p>It would be a billion times better if everyone - especially technically inclined - embraced new technology and realized it isn’t going away no matter how much you complain. It’s just like those who complained about CGI in film - those complaints just got quieter and film studios got quiet about the technology until it was more accepted.<p>You’re allowed to criticize art, but you’re alienating yourselves as consumers, as gamers, and connoisseurs by acting so over-the-top.
> Soon - and even now - there are people getting away with using it that you guys can’t detect.<p>Sure, but that seems largely irrelevant to what's being discussed here.<p>The public in general is anti-AI, so any marketeer thinking that associating AI with their brand is misreading the room, and any thinking that the public are unable to detect it most of the time, especially in something like a video, are just wrong.<p>Is that going to change - will AI-generated content become harder to detect? Sure, but "we know the public hate this, but we can con them" doesn't really sound like a recipe for success. In a world increasingly awash with AI generated content, it's easy to predict that human-generated content and interaction is going to be increasingly valued, and smart companies will realize this.
Consumers and gamers are already alienated. If the price of RAM keeps going up I'm not sure much technology will actually be here to stay. What's the point of AI "art" anyway if everyone needs $10,000 devices to interact with the content? AI isn't going to raise wages, it's just going to enable people to produce more for the same wage.
Strong disagreement on this one, I think the coverage has proven that the current crop if anti-LLM sentiment is a much bigger thing then whatever is happening on this website.<p>In the case of AI generated imagery, maybe it will get to the point where people can't tell just by looking at it. If it does, at what cost? It seems to me that token cost is rising, I can't help but wonder if hiring an illustrator might end up being less expensive in the long run.
> Including young illustrators on Twitter with a whole audience convinced they are drawing by hand.<p>that's called being a grifter not an illustrator
the big far-right party in Austria recently did an AI poster for their 70 year celebration, and there really were 2 type of responses<p>- not their target group, thinking it was cringe and boomer-ish<p>- their uncritical target group, who loved a polished picture of blonde people
"When consumers believe emotional marketing communications are written by AI rather than humans, they judge them as less authentic, feel moral disgust and show weaker engagement and purchase intentions. This happens even when the content is otherwise identical."<p>Well, in general I do not care either way. I regard all ads as propaganda that attempts to steal my time. However had, even then it is indeed true that AI just is an additional annoyance factor, because it means that no real human really invested time - just AI slop that is spammed down onto people, and wastes their time. So I don't agree with the premise in the article to begin with, but most assuredly it is also true that AI slop just is pissing off people. I am noticing this on youtube too and although I don't have data, it seems that enough people were annoyed that the no-AI movement gained more grounds in the last some weeks. Hopfully we'll eventually reach AI extinction - not likely to happen, since some humans are already addicted to AI (see all "contributed with claude" on github spam), but I regard this as a noble goal. Rid this world of AI.