• Tony Bark@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    20 days ago

    They’re throwing billions upon billions into a technology with extremely limited use cases and a novelty, at best. My god, even drones fared better in the long run.

    • 0x01@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      20 days ago

      Nah, generative ai is pretty remarkably useful for software development. I’ve written dozens of product updates with tools like claudecode and cursorai, dismissing it as a novelty is reductive and straight up incorrect

      • neon_nova@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        20 days ago

        As someone starting a small business, it has helped tremendously. I use a lot of image generation.

        If that didn’t exist, I’d either has to use crappy looking clip art or pay a designer which I literally can’t afford.

        Now my projects actually look good. It makes my first projects look like a highschooler did them last minute.

        There are many other uses, but I rely on it daily. My business can exist without it, but the quality of my product is significantly better and the cost to create it is much lower.

            • Ledericas@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              20 days ago

              You’re confusing ai art with actual art, like rendered from illustration and paintings

              • desktop_user@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                19 days ago

                it’s as much “real” art as photography, taking a relatively finite number of decisions and finding something that looks “good”.

                • snooggums@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  19 days ago

                  Really good photography is actually pretty hard and the best photographers are in high demand.

                  It involves a ton of settings for the camera, frequently post processing to balance out anything that wasn’t perfect during the shoot. Plus there is a ton of blocking, lighting, and if doing portraits and other planned shoots there is a lot of directing involved in getting the subjects to be in the right positions/showing the right emotions, etc. Even shooting nature requires a massive amount of planning and work beyond a few camera settings.

                  Hell, even stock photos tend to be a lot of work to set up!

                  If you think that someone taking a photo in focus with adequate lighting and posted it to instagram is the same as professional photography, then you have no idea what is involved.

                  • desktop_user@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    15 days ago

                    it could also be me being bitter about how schools don’t ever offer the raw image files after you pay for the photo. If some asshole wants to ruin the image with post processing they should at least be forced to give the raw to the client.