How Does AI Affect Your Online Shopping?

[Umbran]

So the bible should be considered 'slop', just as most religious texts?

Mod note:

Your religious commentary is not appropriate for these boards. And maybe claiming religious texts harm people is not going to make you sound like the rest of your points are thoughtful.

 

[DragonLancer]

For myself, whether a product was AI produced would not impact my decision positively or negatively. I do think that if a product was made with any AI elements, even just a little, then it should be made public that that is the case and what exactly was created with AI.

If a product was published by a company (or individual) with the funds to hire writers and artists then they should not be using AI, and I would not buy that product. However, a random person at home writing and publishing a PDF adventure or sourcebook for sale as a cheap PDF then I would have no issue with AI art (probably can't afford to pay an artist) but I wouldn't buy it if the product was AI written. I guess that's my line in the sand.

 

[Cadence]

My answer of not liking it assumes AI is equivalent to large language models and their variants (and not the expansive definitions of AI that include seemingly any form of predictive statistical modeling or machine learning) or rudimentary things like spell/grammar checkers or less powerful versions of photo editing/video rendering.

As an aside, I am still giving money to google and data usage/ad views to FB for various things they continue to do in spite of their llm creep everywhere and am not particularly happy about it, but but the pain of switching apparently demonstrates my threshold.

As far as blacklisting, I think I'd wait to see if they fix it when confronted. Much earlier in ai art usage at least one product by a user on here had it, but then they went back and fixed it. I would hate for them to have been blacklisted.

And I admit I would be really, really tempted to listen to AI generated versions of lost recordings of transcribed radio shows (like the 78 missing Candy Matson ones - only 14 exist still). I guess I could have it generate them myself, but will hold off and wait for someone to recruit people to do it some day maybe.

 

[Deset Gled]

How did the early CGI movie stuff evolve to what we have today. How much better will it be in 30 more years. Remember Jurassic Park, Starship Troopers and poor Jar Jar Binks. Ever watch one of these today and think about how cool it was and how lame it is today.

I don't remember many people other than George Lucas being happy with Jar Jar at the time. And that's ignoring the character and just talking about visuals. In fact, I remember the comparisons from Phantom Menace to the Original Trilogy being some of the strongest arguments of why practicals are better than CGI.

Very specifically, I remember the importance of practicals that kids can interact with on set being discussed on the special features of the Zathura DVD. Even at the time, it remember thinking that the director's commentary was taking very thinnly veiled shots at Jar Jar and how much it looked like Jake Lloyd and Ewan McGregor looked through him rather than at him. And Zathura was released in 2005. And the director was Jon Favreau.

 

[aco175]

I don't remember many people other than George Lucas being happy with Jar Jar at the time. And that's ignoring the character and just talking about visuals. In fact, I remember the comparisons from Phantom Menace to the Original Trilogy being some of the strongest arguments of why practicals are better than CGI.

Very specifically, I remember the importance of practicals that kids can interact with on set being discussed on the special features of the Zathura DVD. Even at the time, it remember thinking that the director's commentary was taking very thinnly veiled shots at Jar Jar and how much it looked like Jake Lloyd and Ewan McGregor looked through him rather than at him. And Zathura was released in 2005. And the director was Jon Favreau.

And now 30 years later, he was just the first step to what we have today. Golum in the movies 20 years ago was great at the time, but nobody would go to a movie that looked like that now. AI is at the Jar Jar phase now and will come to be a lot more in the coming years. Not sure if for good or ill.

 

[Deset Gled]

And now 30 years later, he was just the first step to what we have today.

But... he's not. The first step we had was puppetry and animatronics. Then we had Jar Jar. And now we have directors like Jon Favreau making Star Wars who are intentionally going back to using puppetry and animatronics for characters like Grogu specifically because of how much people disliked the bad CGI. Jar Jar wasn't a first step, he was a hard lesson learned from a misstep.

Golum in the movies 20 years ago was great at the time, but nobody would go to a movie that looked like that now.

The Hobbit trilogy is widely criticized for having worse CGI than LotR, not better. And a local theatre alnear me is literally reshowing the LotR trilogy next weekend.

If the point you're trying to make is about the positive momentum of CGI in movies, I understand where you are coming from. But these are some of the worst possible examples you could pick. How about Tron to Tron Legacy, or The Last Starfighter to Babylon 5 to Interstellar?

The examples you give are good reminders that for every step forward, there are an unknown number of steps backward. There's probably a good allegory for AI in there, but I get the impression it's not the one you were trying to make.