<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>pdonis</author><text>&lt;i&gt;&amp;gt; Trading quality for price&lt;/i&gt;&lt;p&gt;Means that many, many more people can have something of passable quality. For example:&lt;p&gt;&lt;i&gt;&amp;gt;  not that long ago all clothes you wore were custom made by a tailor&lt;/i&gt;&lt;p&gt;If you could afford a tailor; otherwise you had to make do with homemade rags that constantly needed mending and looked terrible.&lt;p&gt;&lt;i&gt;&amp;gt; all the music you listened to was played live by musicians&lt;/i&gt;&lt;p&gt;If you could afford to go to concerts.&lt;p&gt;&lt;i&gt;&amp;gt; all stories were brought to life in front of you by theatre actors&lt;/i&gt;&lt;p&gt;If you could afford to go to the theatre.&lt;p&gt;&lt;i&gt;&amp;gt; now all of those while still available are significantly more expensive and niche than the mechanized (production or reproduction) equivalents&lt;/i&gt;&lt;p&gt;Which the vast majority of people can afford, and which significantly improves their quality of life. Now they can buy clothes at Walmart or Target instead of having to wear homemade; sure, not the same as a custom tailored suit, but good enough. Now they can buy digital recordings of world class musicians and theatre actors for much, much less than it would cost to see them live.&lt;p&gt;&lt;i&gt;&amp;gt; ChatGPT, stable diffusion and I am sure upcoming music models will enable this mechanization in the arts&lt;/i&gt;&lt;p&gt;That already happened decades ago, as soon as mass produced recordings became widely available. It&amp;#x27;s already next to impossible for any artist who isn&amp;#x27;t world class (or, more precisely, is not publicized so that people &lt;i&gt;think&lt;/i&gt; they&amp;#x27;re world class) to make a living at their art. ChatGPT and the equivalent in other arts aren&amp;#x27;t going to affect that much.</text><parent_chain><item><author>tetraodonpuffer</author><text>Trading quality for price has been happening everywhere for long enough that it is easy to see how unfortunately it will now play out in the arts as well. I mean, not that long ago all clothes you wore were custom made by a tailor, all the music you listened to was played live by musicians, all stories were brought to life in front of you by theatre actors: now all of those while still available are significantly more expensive and niche than the mechanized (production or reproduction) equivalents.&lt;p&gt;ChatGPT, stable diffusion and I am sure upcoming music models will enable this mechanization in the arts, where great artists will be unaffected but making it nearly impossible for “good enough” artists to compete while also pushing up the floor of what is an acceptable competency level that merits being paid for making it more difficult for people to support themselves while improving their skills.</text></item><item><author>_petronius</author><text>I&amp;#x27;m less worried about stuff like ChatGPT killing things off, but more about just making everything noticeably a bit worse.&lt;p&gt;To take an analogy: bad voice recognition software abounds everywhere, not because it is better than what it replaced in terms of UX, but because it works &lt;i&gt;just enough&lt;/i&gt; and allows massive cost-savings on hiring people to do customer service jobs.&lt;p&gt;A world where most marketing copy is written by mediocre AI, and more and more written and visual content are generated by big models that are technically impressive but intellectually hollow is going to be one where the quality of everything sucks just a bit more, but it&amp;#x27;s so cheap that it becomes pervasive.&lt;p&gt;(This trend is already apparent and not created by, or limited to, ChatGPT.)</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>ChatGPT Can&apos;t Kill Anything Worth Preserving</title><url>https://biblioracle.substack.com/p/chatgpt-cant-kill-anything-worth</url></story>
<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>jerf</author><text>Also have to consider the kicking of the ladder away. Nobody gets to excellent without passing through the lower stages. Hard to stay motivated if it&amp;#x27;ll be 5 years just to see if maybe you have something a computer can&amp;#x27;t offer.&lt;p&gt;Not impossible, but definitely a raising of the bar.</text><parent_chain><item><author>tetraodonpuffer</author><text>Trading quality for price has been happening everywhere for long enough that it is easy to see how unfortunately it will now play out in the arts as well. I mean, not that long ago all clothes you wore were custom made by a tailor, all the music you listened to was played live by musicians, all stories were brought to life in front of you by theatre actors: now all of those while still available are significantly more expensive and niche than the mechanized (production or reproduction) equivalents.&lt;p&gt;ChatGPT, stable diffusion and I am sure upcoming music models will enable this mechanization in the arts, where great artists will be unaffected but making it nearly impossible for “good enough” artists to compete while also pushing up the floor of what is an acceptable competency level that merits being paid for making it more difficult for people to support themselves while improving their skills.</text></item><item><author>_petronius</author><text>I&amp;#x27;m less worried about stuff like ChatGPT killing things off, but more about just making everything noticeably a bit worse.&lt;p&gt;To take an analogy: bad voice recognition software abounds everywhere, not because it is better than what it replaced in terms of UX, but because it works &lt;i&gt;just enough&lt;/i&gt; and allows massive cost-savings on hiring people to do customer service jobs.&lt;p&gt;A world where most marketing copy is written by mediocre AI, and more and more written and visual content are generated by big models that are technically impressive but intellectually hollow is going to be one where the quality of everything sucks just a bit more, but it&amp;#x27;s so cheap that it becomes pervasive.&lt;p&gt;(This trend is already apparent and not created by, or limited to, ChatGPT.)</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>ChatGPT Can&apos;t Kill Anything Worth Preserving</title><url>https://biblioracle.substack.com/p/chatgpt-cant-kill-anything-worth</url></story>