Do they? Because when this come up what I usually hear is more apologetic - something along the lines of “oh, I didn’t actually make it”. They certainly won’t try to defend it when pushed.

I take pride in my cooking

I would say “I reheated a pizza” if I lowered myself to doing that

When I say that I make something, I made it from scratch

And AI would hand you a salad calling it a pizza.

Your analogy doesn’t work. Anyone could take a photograph, just like anyone could paint something, but making it art, eliciting a human reaction, requires skill.

And by the way, not every moment in history when a technological breakthrough threatened a well established craft, can or should be compared to the current state of AI, if anything because it paints a picture where anyone opposing change is some sort of luddite. “Change” is not always a good thing, and there are more than a handful of inconvenient examples: atomic vs conventional weapons, cigarettes vs herbal treatments for anxiety, leaded vs unleaded gasoline for increased engine performance, glass and paper vs plastic in food containers, etc. For each one, incessant marketing campaigns were launched, touting their advantages and how they would improve the world as we knew it. World Expos were organized around these things. People were legitimately excited.

The truth wasn’t quite that. The US found itself in a tight spot when they lost the monopoly on nuclear weapons, which triggered a histeria across the country that lasted for decades, and even nowadays, “nuclear deterrence” conditions geopolitics to the maximum degree. Cigarettes, turned out, weren’t as good to calm nerves as they were killing people. Leaded gasoline, which was the answer given by refineries to the question “what if we stop improving refining processes and start adding literal poison as an additive”. And microplastics are the latest in all the ways humans have found to screw the food chain.

AI slop is AI slop, but if you compare it to a film director explaining to a concept artist or director of photography what he wants, then selecting and refining examples and concept art and sketching out a storyboard, there is little difference to someone using AI to make some film. Just that the latter will typically be much worse because anyone can do it now, they won’t have studied film making, and AI isn’t very good at it so far. But either can be art, or it can be garbage.

Also with advances in hardware and better tools and software and models, we could see a new type of art form or medium. Something like the holodeck in star trek. Like a movie that is more interactive, like a role playing session in VR. Told to you by a narrator but you can interject and steer or derail the narrative. So the “directors” become more like world builders or campaign designers.

That is a good argument.

Family recipe

Yeah I was surprised no other comments here picked that up, I thought that had to be on purpose.

The sad part it did try… and wasted electricity and water

You forgot the part where they steal the pizzas from other parlors to sell them as thier own.

Cheese Pizza

Then FBI strums in

And because of that, unfortnately, a lot of regular people also think the entire point of technology and wealth is to never have to do anything substantive.

That’s one of the core injustices of capitalism.

Rich person says “Build a thing”

Workers design, research, and build the thing.

Rich person keeps the profits.

That’s why they don’t see any problem with replacing workers with AI. They think AI will do X better than humans do just like machines could build X better than humans could at the beginning of the industrial revolution.

But the cost benefit analysis often proves to be quite the opposite in the long-term, despite deceptive short-term gains. But a short-term gains seem to be all that businesses seem to care about.

I fully get where you’re coming from. I fully believe that you can’t vibe code correctly unless you already know how to code correctly. I’m against the shifting paradigm of “who cares what the code looks like aa long as it works properly and the LLM can read it quickly” bullshit that’s coming out of it. I want to read the code and understand it too. I want it to be object oriented and not just dumb ad hoc methods everywhere that’s 1,000 lines when it could’ve been 100 lines.

Now anecdotally, as someone who uses it for my main work and side project, I am still getting a lot of use out of it. I’m learning new things at a faster rate than I would have before. For my side project, I am trying to optimize gear sets for a game and there’s hundreds of millions of different configurations. The LLM I’m using knows about my code and the project and what I need and is able to suggest other algorithms, like I was able to learn about Dinkelbach’s algorithm. I have it write up design docs with formulas and pseudocode implementation and I review that and it takes my comments into account. I treat it like a junior developer and ask for questions to make sure I understand what it’s doing. I think a lot of people aren’t treating it like a junior developer or intern and that’s where problems come from.

Now, I wouldn’t be using it if it wasn’t free with my company, as this is more of “learning/research” for my job.

And for my job, we have semantic memory and a ton of MCP servers setup that guide it through the right code and can do internal documentation search so it’s way more powerful than just using base Claude Code or whatever. It has helped me stay more on track with my projects as an ADHD person (even though I’m medicated) by documenting what it does after it does it in a shared doc rather than me forgetting to do that because I run a command and log off for the day or something.

I do hate the water usage and energy usage though…

Imagine if you put that much time into a useful skill.

You forgot to specify Italian DOP cheese, now you have a pizza oozing with shitty Kraft/Lactalis pseudo-cheese.

Receives pizza

“Why is it covered with pineapple?!?”