Hacker News
points by FailMore 1 day ago | 0 comments
I think alignment is the missing part of this post.

Creating something visually interesting Invisible-Cities-ish is basically a task with a billion or more satisfactory outcomes. You don't have a precise view on what makes an invisible city a good one as long as it has all the fancy looking bells and whistles. This means the AI can generate a bunch of tokens which as long as they technically work (which it seems the max-thinking did not fully) produce a "good" result. This makes you think - wow AI is impressive. However if many things in the system really mattered, it might have been much less successful as the AI may have made poor assumptions. This was basically a task that given a large volume of tokens and technical competence it's fairly easy for the AI to do a good job at because we don't evaluate it with any depth/precision. I think the same is true for music, where there are basically an infinite number of combinations of sounds, beats, melodies, etc. which are pleasant to hear - and songs aren't mission critical - so alignment is not a big issue. Generative AI is good at these tasks.

[–] Mawr 1 day ago
Correct. There's another angle to this too; even for tasks that do have strict requirements, the asker may just have low standards, so to them the output is perfectly acceptable, even if objectively very far from optimum. Hence the nonsense like "look, AI one-shot Photoshop!" we hear so much about. No, it didn't.
Hacker News