Tried using it yesterday. VIM mode stopped working in VS Code and then my cursor started moving around randomly and wouldn't stop. Uninstalled instantly.
I’m sorry about that. Our code (https://github.com/sourcegraph/cody), which is open source (Apache 2), doesn’t do anything to move the cursor, so I have no idea how that would have happened. Would you be willing to try to repro that in an issue or give us some more info so we can look into it?
I didn't think of this thank you! I wanted to stream in my friend's server for my friends to watch but his server isn't boosted, but now I'm gonna join a random server and stream for strangers instead!
I love that it often recommends me videos from small channels, often with 0 view. This started happening only about a few months ago I don't know if it's just me.
This is really cool but can someone tell me why we are automating art? Who asked for this? The future seems depressing when I look at all this AI generated art.
Because tons of people want to make art, and a lot of art currently requires years of training to make anything close to "good". Making art more accessible to create is a boon to everyone who's dreamed of being able to make their own paintings and music, but doesn't have the skills required.
Everyone asked for this, including artists. If you make a living off of making art, having the best tools to help you do that is a constant, and the tools are finally starting to get properly good. Will "the job" change because of the tools? Of course. Will the nature of what it means for something to be art change? Also of course. Art isn't some static, untouchable thing. It changes as humanity does.
Actually I agree with you, but HN is not really a place where you will find artists defending themselves. However you will find alot of people defending the automation of art. Generative art has it's place. But ultimately until humans are extinct, human generated art is the only thing which really represents the species. Everything else is an advanced form of puppetry or mimicry.
I would say it's not "generated," but interpolated...
It doesn't make anything new or fresh. It doesn't pull any real-life emotions or experiences into a synthesis that a person can relate to. It's more like asking a teenaged comedian to imitate numerous impressions of music styles. e.g. in Clerks when the Russian guy does "metal": https://youtu.be/7gFoHkkCaRE?t=55
Of course the modern conception of music in the West is as an accompaniment to other, mostly drudging, activities, as opposed to something to be paid singularly attention. Therefore, there are many "valuable"(*) occasions to produce "impressions" of music. E.g. in advertisements and social media flexes where identity and attitude are the purpose of music. For these, a shallow interpretation or reflection of loosely amalgamated sound clips will suffice. But we don't just attend concerts or focus sustained energy on sonic impressions. We listen to lyrics and give over our consciousness to composed works because we want to find secrets others give away in dealing with this crazy thing called life- ideas to succeed, admissions of failure, and what the expected emotional arcs of these trajectories looks like. This lofty goal is to date not within the scope of AI stunts.
As Solzheinetysn said, "Too much art is like candy and not bread."
You can't automate a live performance or an oil painting with AI in this way. This isn't going to replace musicians and artists. If anything, I think a preponderance of AI art would make people appreciate the real stuff more.
As to why, music is fun to create, and this is just a tool.
We're not automating art, we're creating tools that make it easier for humans to create art. These are nothing more than new and exciting tools. The cream will still rise to the top, same as it ever was.
> Do you think "AI prompters" will earn the same amount as animators?
The typical animator doesn't make much. I knew one who worked for a well known movie animation studio. They hire as needed and then let them go easily after the movie is made. He made enough to pay bills, but not much more.
> prompting an AI requires much less skill than animating it yourself
s/much less skill/different stills/
> Do you think "AI prompters" will earn the same amount as animators?
I do, because animation is not inherently valuable. The value they are paid for is solving a problem, the same problem AI prompters will solve. It is totally valid to argue that AI will reduce the total amount of animators, I think that will happen.
> It is totally valid to argue that AI will reduce the total amount of animators, I think that will happen.
I don’t think that will happen because I believe induced demand is a thing. I think animators will produce more and more efficiently, I also think that amateurs will be animating stuff that they’re currently not animating because it is too hard. I think we will see a huge proliferation in animation as the craft becomes easier, and with the proliferation professionals will not only keep their jobs, but they will actually see their profession expand.
As a comparison, the textile industry still employs millions of experts despite the craft having been automated with the automatic loom as early as the 1780s.
I think there is a fundamental difference between creative work like apparel, programming or animation and basic necessities or basic materials like mining, farming, dying, etc.
To continue with the fabric industry. The automatic removed jobs in weaving fabric, but it made fabric cheaper and created many times those jobs in sewing this fabric.
Much less skill and different skills. Declaring that it will take the same level of skill (measured in mean amount of training and practice to do the job) in order to make a finished product is an appeal to the law of averages. It does not take the same amount of skill to typeset a book well in InDesign as it did to typeset a book in e.g. the 1930s.
True, but there are way more typesetters employed today than in the 1930s, and what they are able to do with their skills has changed a lot. I guess I’m just arguing that animation will follow the same path.
Depends - at what level does the result become "good enough"? I suspect that with animation we are still far away from this, so the expert "AI prompters" and those who can fix the results will be in high demand. It takes a lot of know-how to be able to tell what is wrong with some animation.
Disagree. I was absolutely miserable when I was forced to meet with people in real life, although I enjoyed some interactions, deep down I never liked hanging out with them. Unless you are very lucky and born in a location where you can easily find like-minded people or if your personality is suited for meeting random people and not having any preferences in friends (kind of people who can be friends with anyone they meet), then being forced to meet people is hell. I'd rather have online friends that have similar interests/sense of humor etc... Than have forced and shallow "real" relationships where I have to change who I am in order to fit in.
I could never take notes in school or in college. I tried many times but I just forget about them and never check them anyway, and if I do they are pretty useless because my understanding of whatever I'm learning changes pretty quickly so if I look at my notes 2 days later they won't make any sense to me.
