Although, my AI-generation was a response to an interesting comment. You do not think readers are interested to see how the Chernobyl snow-globes look like?! (Looking at AI generated images or store links.)
But we wouldn't know what it looks like, we would only know what your AI thinks it looks like. So no, we're not interested in filling up our heads with vaguely related AI slop. If you had actually posted the store link that would be an entirely different question, which you've somehow tried to conflate with generated images.
I clicked on it at least twice and found it disgusting. If more people were like you, thinking this is a good idea, i would stop posting my IRL stories to the internet.
> Although, my AI-generation was a response to an interesting comment.
Yes, that's why the comment it was in response to was not downvoted. But being interesting and HN-appropriate isn't something responses automatically inherent from their parent comment.
> You do not think readers are interested to see how the Chernobyl snow-globes look like?!
Actual Chernobyl snow globes... maybe a link to that would be appropriate.
AI hallucinations of what they might look like? Maybe if the context was a discussion of the capacities of different AI models and it was offered as a demonstration of the one that generated it, but not in the context it was presented, no.
I think this _is_ indeed interesting and also indicative of where AI art is going, unironically. People has much higher tolerance for human made low-effort memes.
