[HN Gopher] Businesses with ugly AI menu redesigns
___________________________________________________________________
Businesses with ugly AI menu redesigns
Author : speckx
Score : 207 points
Date : 2026-07-22 12:49 UTC (15 hours ago)
HTML web link (blog.fiddery.com)
TEXT w3m dump (blog.fiddery.com)
| gegtik wrote:
| I do think that AI signage/advertising is the new signifier of
| low-effort, low-skill output and that is how it will be perceived
| by clientele.
|
| Similar to someone just scrawling a sandwich board sign in chalk
| (which at this point I would prefer).
|
| Businesses will stand out from a taste perspective by continuing
| to hire human effort to make recognisable human output.
| dec0dedab0de wrote:
| Writing in signs and menus in chalk has been a signal for a
| high quality restaurant for as long as I can remember. With
| photos of the food, and/or ring bound menus being the worst.
| amelius wrote:
| Chalk writing robot/printer in the making ...
| taude wrote:
| The Tour De France had one a long time ago, writing chalk
| signage on the roads [1]. I had to search for the YouTube
| video about it....
|
| [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Khffa2GkvPE
| PyWoody wrote:
| I knew someone that actually got a degree in like
| letterprinting with a minor in menu design. She went from
| town-to-town creating these beautiful chalk menu designs and
| lived a pretty modest life.
|
| One day a tattoo parlor asked her to make a sign. She did.
| They asked if she had ever thought about getting into
| tattooing. She hadn't. They gave her an apprenticeship.
|
| After completing her apprenticeship, she's now booked so far
| into advance that she closed her book to the public.
|
| I think about her all the time now, what with software
| engineering going the way that it is. What lateral like
| passion could I transition to, as she did?
| monk_grilla wrote:
| > ... with software engineering going the way that it is.
| What lateral like passion could I transition to, as she
| did?
|
| A question I ask myself increasingly frequently. Do let us
| know if you find any answer.
| bombcar wrote:
| Don't let your memes be dreams! This time next month you
| could be tattooing buffer overflows on someone's ass.
| square_usual wrote:
| Photos of the food, at least in the US, started with
| "immigrant" restaurants. When Thai/Vietnamese/Chinese
| restaurants started opening up in areas without high
| concentrations of those people, they'd put photos in the menu
| so you could see what you were getting since that wouldn't be
| clear from the names or descriptions in the menu. A lot of
| these restaurants were cheap, which is why I think you
| associate it with low-quality restaurants.
| alamortsubite wrote:
| U.S. chains like IHOP and Denny's beat the mom-and-pop
| immigrant restaurants by decades (and they are truly
| terrible). I wouldn't be surprised if they got the idea
| from even lower quality chains like McDonald's, but I'm not
| old enough to know.
| gegtik wrote:
| I did say "scrawl",
| Jtarii wrote:
| Escaping AI slop will become a privilege for the wealthy.
| cautiouscat wrote:
| > Similar to someone just scrawling a sandwich board sign in
| chalk
|
| As opposed to what? This is usually a sign of quality. If it's
| in chalk it's because it changes as the restaurant experiments
| and tries new things.
| Marsymars wrote:
| Yeah, there's a great bar I sometimes go to where the taplist
| is a chalkboard because of their ~20 taps they're typically
| changing at least one per day to a new keg.
| iamleppert wrote:
| AI menus and signage are quickly becoming the dog whistle for
| "cheap". It's telling you what kind of quality and service you
| should expect in the rest of their product or service. Pretty
| soon people will catch on, and start avoiding these places. Once
| that happens, generative AI image models will be hard-pressed to
| drop the association. It's like walking into a dollar store --
| everything can be made cheaply, so it doesn't matter if something
| there is actually of any value.
| datadrivenangel wrote:
| Except sometimes cheap places are great because the food is
| good and they don't spend money on ambience and other
| pretentious expenditures.
| FinnLobsien wrote:
| I've come around to the other side of this in a way. I used to
| think "wow they don't care at all" the same way I previously
| looked at menus clearly made in MS Word: The place will probably
| be cheap and they don't care about having fancy menu design.
|
| From there, it's two possibilities:
|
| -They care about the food at the expensive of design and it's
| going to be cheap and great (good) -They care about the food as
| much as the design and it's going to suck (bad)
|
| This switch happened after a new place opened in my neighborhood
| that had AI signage and is now my favorite lunch spot.
| spider-mario wrote:
| Perhaps in part Berkson's paradox in action?
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berkson's_paradox
| FinnLobsien wrote:
| Possibly, but I think it's a bit more intuitive than that.
| It's basically just like companies with terrible websites:
|
| Most of them are terrible because they no longer exist, have
| no budget because they're not making money, or because
| they're bad at doing things generally.
|
| But then there's a set of companies that do fantastically
| well and are so busy serving customers (or are satisfied with
| their results) that their website doesn't matter. In that
| case, the bad website is an indicator for a good product.
| jdw64 wrote:
| There are a lot of these on websites too. There was a design that
| was pretty good back in the day, but lately I've been getting
| quite a few requests to change it to the trendy Linear-style AI
| design. As more sites use AI-generated images, I think some
| people have come to see that as the trend
| pietmichal wrote:
| Remember "Hey Look, It's Every Bootstrap Website Ever"?
| http://www.dagusa.com/
| jdw64 wrote:
| Yes, exactly. Bootstrap homogenized layout, and now AI seems
| to be homogenizing both layout and imagery at the same time.
| jvanderbot wrote:
| Hand-made comfort food will be as much a luxury as hand-made
| menus.
| _override wrote:
| My personal opinion is that these days most people simply
| wouldn't be able to tell that the photos are AI generated, and
| even if they could, they wouldn't care or have any strong
| thoughts about it. I don't think my parents or any adults aged
| 50+ in my family have spent any time at all playing around with
| AI image generation tools or comparing AI-generated images to
| non-AI-generated images to be able to have any opinions about
| these things.
|
| So until more people frequenting restaurants care it's a
| relatively low risk and low cost way to update your menu.
| reactordev wrote:
| Senior citizens are the most vulnerable
| tencentshill wrote:
| I do miss tacky, over-styled menus sometimes. Doesn't excuse the
| fake food pictures though.
| duskdozer wrote:
| I think the Japanese laws requiring strict truth in food
| advertising would be a good transplant.
| kdheiwns wrote:
| Japanese menus are increasingly full of AI pictures as well.
| TechSquidTV wrote:
| We have RUINED the food industry. It started with gig-work
| delivery. Restaurants will never recover from GrubHub and ghost
| kitchens. Food quality and service died years ago.
|
| Now, they don't have to pay for or manage delivery people, or pay
| anyone to make their menus for them.
|
| There are no consequences to lying. People have a bad experience
| sure, but they'll forget next time they order off grubhub and
| simply search for "burrito near me" and click on the first good
| looking food.
| floatrock wrote:
| We always expect what was promised to be different than what was
| delivered to some degree, but I'm not sure restaurants have fully
| weighed the expectations-vs-reality backlash this may cause...
| uncannily-wrong details aside for a sec, the AI pics always set
| michelin-level presentation expectations. The final promise-vs-
| plate pics in this post were pretty dramatic.
|
| There's always a class of restaurants where they don't care about
| repeat visitors. Think the cafe in front of a major tourist
| attraction: every day brings a new busload of 1-time patrons,
| those will always want the michelin-level pics to bait the 1-time
| foot-traffic in. The danger is the neighborhood mom-and-pops will
| start using the same trick without understanding they need repeat
| customers, and repeat disappointment kills a repeat audience.
|
| But who knows... people with a TV budget have been using glue in
| their cheesy pizza commercials, soap in their beer glass foam,
| and motor oil on their pancake stacks for a long time --
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9k7PJoNAXkk -- maybe this is just
| equalizing the enshittified food playing field.
| xeetzer wrote:
| For now I have the opposite problem. The AI pics look way worse
| than the food they have, which is unfortunate for mom-and-pop
| businesses.
| fwip wrote:
| I actually had the opposite reaction - the AI image looked
| grotesque, and the the real food was like "oh damn this looks
| like good food."
| nitwit005 wrote:
| I think the problem will tend to be more mundane. Picture shows
| nine chicken tenders, but you get three. You're going to wonder
| where your other six chicken tenders are.
| brap wrote:
| I think if you showed these before/after menus to people from 5
| years ago, most would tell you it's a massive improvement.
|
| But now many of us have been trained to detect slop from miles
| away so it just comes across as cheap.
|
| I often feel the same way when I glance at a project's
| documentation and it's long and full of markdown styles and
| emojis: "the author didn't think about the users at all, they
| just wanted to get this over with quickly, so now I have to be
| super suspicious of everything I read here and it might end up
| being a huge waste of my time". A few years ago I'd probably
| think "wow, emojis!"
| qgin wrote:
| There is this new thing where people love to show off their
| sophistication that they can "spot AI". Every time they see an a
| Claudeism, every time they see an emdash, they talk about how
| they feel sick to their stomach and are ready to boycott the
| business that may or may not be guilty of the high crime of using
| a computer tool.
| CookieCrisp wrote:
| But don't you understand! A menu created with AI has no soul!
| hei-lima wrote:
| Yeah, this thought is lame. It's not so bad in other areas, but
| in food, I would really like to see REAL pictures of what I'm
| about to order. I mean, "fake" or deceitful pictures always
| existed, but at least there were real ingredients and so on. I
| will NEVER boycott some family restaurant because the menu is
| AI generated, but it is tasteless and I prefer not to see it.
| hei-lima wrote:
| I live in Brazil, and on our delivery apps (like iFood), AI
| photos have become a plague. It's so bad seeing pictures with
| that distinct GPT look. You just don't know what your rice and
| beans will look like.
| mjhay wrote:
| In the US, some of those apps were generating gross nonsense
| like showing an image of a pizza with a sweet pie filling
| (because the menu said "pizza pie").
|
| I don't get how AI images like this don't open them up to false
| advertising lawsuits
| qingcharles wrote:
| This one is really disturbing because I can't tell what the
| food is even supposed to be without looking at the words,
| plus trypophobia:
|
| https://imgur.com/a/YvyRjts
| decimalenough wrote:
| C'mon, how bad can it be...
|
| <click>
|
| ...OK, that's not just bad, that's positively disturbing.
| tortilla wrote:
| "Great vibes. Great times."
|
| Every restaurant/bar in my area has that phrase in their AI
| flyers.
|
| "All slop. All shit."
| biophysboy wrote:
| Low effort products will be used by low effort companies. In the
| case of restaurants, this might not necessarily be bad - I've
| been to amazing taco/burrito shops w abysmal menus. But if I went
| to a "high end" place with an AI menu and instagram decor - bad,
| bad sign.
|
| I genuinely think AI companies need to worry more about their
| brand. Just through how their products are used, they are
| perceived as a marker for low quality.
| ghostly_s wrote:
| Anthropic has been running the exact same video ad in my
| youtube feed for months showing a guy making the tackiest
| "impossible" coffee table hanging from chains that I wouldn't
| even bother clicking on if it were a thumbnail from a favorite
| woodworker. I'd think if ChatGPT were such a great creative
| tool they could use it to create more than one ad....
| huhkerrf wrote:
| Are you implying that Anthropic is using ChatGPT internally?
| mlekoszek wrote:
| > But if I went to a "high end" place with an AI menu and
| instagram decor - bad, bad sign.
|
| Sometimes I wonder if this will settle into its own form of
| kitsch over the years, and whether people will someday try to
| emulate it (with a wink and a nod).
| kalleboo wrote:
| It'd be one thing if it was just the problem of a generic AI slop
| graphic design that all looks the same, the problem is when it
| generates pictures of food that literally looks disgusting. I've
| seen some of these posted online where the food literally looks
| like it's infected (fries with weird black splotches), or the
| jalapenos look like tires, and it all triggers trypophobia.
| _joel wrote:
| Well at least the peas weren't upside down...
|
| https://preview.redd.it/the-peas-are-upside-down-v0-5pwo713b...
| whywhywhywhy wrote:
| This is unironically soulful though.
| huhkerrf wrote:
| I don't think that's AI. It looks more like crappy photoshop.
| abrugsch wrote:
| Not even photoshop. Literal cut and paste of physical photos
| :D
| tomjakubowski wrote:
| As a digital native, I was shocked to learn that
| Photoshop's dodge and burn tools were based on real
| physical techniques for photo development!
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodging_and_burning
| Rendello wrote:
| It's been floating around the Internet since at least 2019.
| It's classic, _soulful_ bad editing.
| abrugsch wrote:
| looks like every kebab shop menu near me. All offerings crudely
| cut/pasted/mashed together. 5 near me literally have the same
| menu with different prices and a colour theme to match their
| (usually terrible, 3-D font effect from 90's era Corel Draw)
| Logo. And they were like that BEFORE GenAI got popular!
| ericpauley wrote:
| This brought back fond memories of my favorite kebab cart in
| college. Looked back at their cart on Google Maps and some of
| the menu items are just the same image stretched differently.
| _joel wrote:
| small, medium and large.
| qingcharles wrote:
| M.C. Escher opens a restaurant.
| _joel wrote:
| "Yes sir, your table is upstairs, just go up via the
| basement."
| j4yav wrote:
| Nothing says delicious meal like the liberal application of the
| AI image piss filter
| simonw wrote:
| I'm fascinated by how AI poster designs have taken over local
| advertising in seemingly just the last six months - presumably
| because ChatGPT Images and Gemini Nano Banana finally got good
| enough at outputting text without obvious defects in the
| typography.
|
| The posters all look good - much better than their desktop
| publishing predecessors. And yet they also eat away at the
| credibility of the event or business for me.
|
| It's hard to trust a poster when the quality of the design has
| zero relation to the amount of effort that went into creating it.
|
| But is that a widespread feeling, are the vibes bad for regular
| people, or is this effectively just old man shouting at clouds?
| couchand wrote:
| Not just you. There's been a huge pushback in the local music
| community around this. Concerts listings now prominently
| feature the name of the poster designer! Humans FTW.
| wingworks wrote:
| Finally! We need more of this. It did happen sometimes in the
| past, but not nearly as often as it should.
| adw wrote:
| One of the coolest things about seeing a show at the Fillmore
| is getting the posters they hand out. A number of bands sell,
| or have their artists, sell show posters (which then become
| collectible limited editions); it's way less offensive when
| it's King Gizzard and the Lizard Wizard than when it's
| Wizards of the Coast.
| OtherShrezzing wrote:
| >But is that a widespread feeling, are the vibes bad for
| regular people, or is this effectively just old man shouting at
| clouds?
|
| A cursory glance at YouGov strongly suggests that people have
| bad vibes about AI in basically every territory where they're
| asked about it, and for basically every use-case
| simonw wrote:
| How many of the people who answer polls like that also have
| the ability to look at a poster and instantly clock that it
| was AI-generated?
| qingcharles wrote:
| Almost none, sadly. Most of the population just doesn't
| have that skill, which is why places like Facebook are just
| reams of AI Jesus upvoted to the Moon.
|
| I saw this menu online the other day, and it's not even
| discernable from the photo what the food products are; it
| even sets off trypophobia:
|
| https://imgur.com/a/YvyRjts
|
| But people are still ordering it.
| somewhereoutth wrote:
| I suspect it is a fair representation of the food you
| would receive - looks kinda like real food, but actually
| isn't.
| jackvalentine wrote:
| Here is a picture of the food you actually get along with
| the poster.
|
| https://www.reddit.com/r/mildlyinfuriating/comments/1uv0x
| cq/...
| ryandrake wrote:
| I agree. For most people I've talked to, when this topic
| comes up, they'll tell me they don't like AI, but then
| cannot really identify it. Especially the elderly folks
| in my neighborhood. You look at their facebook feeds and
| it's 100% slop. No joke. Every. Single. Post. Is. AI.
| Slop. And for the most part they can't tell.
| qingcharles wrote:
| The problem is in 2026 I work in this space and it's
| getting to the point where I can no longer tell
| sometimes. By next year we're probably all cooked. My
| first go-to now on an image is TinEye.. if it first
| appeared before AI then I know it's safe.
| andrewflnr wrote:
| They don't care, because it's only tangentially about the
| concrete output. It's about the hollowing of human
| communication and creativity.
| customguy wrote:
| What's the argument here? People don't like spit in their
| food, how many people can tell their food got spat in? Does
| that mean they're somehow wrong or to be belittled for not
| liking spit in their food?
| simonw wrote:
| It's not an argument, it's an open question: do people
| who express a dislike of AI know when they see a poster
| that was generated with assistance from AI?
| customguy wrote:
| I meant to ask what the point of the question is
| basically. What would change, what would it matter for,
| if the answer was yes or no?
|
| Besides it being so general a question to really be
| useless as anything but an insinuation IMO, which is why
| I'm trying to tease that insinuation out. E.g. are people
| who use Apple left-handed? Are they gay? The answer is
| "yes, some of them, of course, but also many aren't...
| _why are you asking?_ "
|
| There is no thing as "just a question, nothing in mind
| really". That does not exist. The mind that can ask a
| question cannot arrive at it in a vacuum.
| simonw wrote:
| OK, my point here is that a YouGov poll about people's
| attitude to AI may not tell us anything actionable about
| how people feel about AI posters - it depends on how good
| they are at detecting them.
| gtowey wrote:
| I agree with others saying that this doesn't disqualify
| complaints.
|
| In fact, it can be precisely _because_ they can 't tell the
| difference that they would be concerned about consuming AI
| outputs when they don't know they are. If someone wants to
| take a stand and only read human text and human art then we
| may need regulation to add notices when text and images are
| LLM outputs.
| tgv wrote:
| > how AI poster designs have taken over local advertising
|
| Tale as old as time: a race to the bottom. Businesses trying to
| cut corners, thinking they can offset it against losses from
| exiting customers. If it wasn't, a lot will just cut more
| corners.
| simonw wrote:
| I don't think it's a corner cutting thing though.
|
| These businesses weren't paying someone to make a flier. The
| business owner was sweating for an hour in Microsoft Word and
| producing something that looked terrible.
|
| I expect they are now investing approximately the same about
| of time iterating in ChatGPT and producing something that
| genuinely looks like a huge improvement to them.
| joshstrange wrote:
| This.
|
| I said it elsewhere in this thread differently but people
| want to pretend the options are:
|
| 1. Paying a local designer to make a bespoke beautiful
| poster
|
| OR
|
| 2. Use AI
|
| It's not, the money is often just not there to pay someone.
| So you get whatever the intern or the owner can slap
| together in whatever tool they know best (which is rarely
| the best tool for the job).
|
| It's completely understandable that they would reach for
| LLMs to help improve their posters.
|
| So many people are anti-AI/anti-LLM just because it is
| AI/LLM, not because it's objectively worse than the
| alternative. It's tiring.
|
| It's the Electron vs Native argument all over again. Sure,
| we'd all love hand-crafted, beautiful, low-resource native
| applications for everything, that takes a lot of time
| and/or money. It's a decision between Native and Electron,
| it's a decision between Electron or nothing (or at best
| only 1 OS supported).
| simonw wrote:
| What's weird here is that I should be in total agreement
| with you.
|
| I love it when AI tools are used to give people the
| ability to solve problems that previously they could not
| solve well.
|
| For the fliers I'm talking about here (think a hardware
| store promoting their summer sale) I don't think the
| impact on the local poster design community is
| meaningful.
|
| And yet... the resulting posters put me off. I'm trying
| to figure out why that is. I think the best explanation I
| have is the lack of _intention_ behind them - knowing
| that none of the visual details - the illustrations, the
| typographic flair - had anyone thinking about them while
| they were constructed.
| steveklabnik wrote:
| Okay I've been thinking about this a lot lately, and
| here's my "I'm currently drinking my coffee" take on
| this. I'm willing to be significantly wrong here, but for
| the sake of discussion, here's where I think I'm at.
|
| I also agree with
|
| > I love it when AI tools are used to give people the
| ability to solve problems that previously they could not
| solve well.
|
| But I also really hate these menus, I see them all the
| time as well. I think that my conclusion is slightly
| different than yours: in my opinion, just not a lot of
| people have taste. That's sort of like, true by the
| definition of taste, but what I mean is something more
| specific: it's not _because of AI_ that I dislike these
| signs. It 's because of what you said above:
|
| > producing something that genuinely looks like a huge
| improvement to them.
|
| While it looks like a huge improvement _to them_ , it
| does not to me. Our tastes differ.
|
| Here's a version of this that doesn't involve AI at all:
| last night I ate sushi at a place I'd never been before.
| Their menu was a bit chaotic, and had a bunch of
| annotations, along with a guide to those annotations. One
| section had both "2" and "2 pieces" listed under the
| options, and so I was confused: what was the difference
| here? Turns out it's basically just a typo, both mean
| that. Combine that with some spelling mistakes, and yeah,
| I had a pretty bad impression of the menu. The sushi was
| fine though, I'd go back. But this wasn't a super low-end
| place, so the attention to detail being off made me a bit
| worried before I actually ate the food.
|
| Same problem, same issue, AI is really the only variable
| here. And it is the natural downside of "democratization"
| or "helping more people do more things", naturally, there
| will be a lot more low-quality stuff out there than
| before. That's not actually inherently a bad thing. But
| it can feel weird.
| joshstrange wrote:
| I guess I see very little "soul" in most
| marketing/advertising in the first place. It was slop
| well before LLMs entered the scene. If my local hardware
| store wants to put up a poster for their summer sale I
| don't care if it's black comic sans on white paper or if
| it's a AI-generated advertisement. Either way I'm not
| looking that closely at it and neither version were going
| to show up in an art museum or recieve design accolades.
|
| There is so little intention in anything (again, even
| before LLMs) so I don't begrudge places for using LLMs to
| try and produce similar quality to what larger
| chains/corps are able to commision.
|
| I see this as similar to things like people wanting
| "clean ingredients" or "sustainable packaging" or
| "healthy food" in restaurants/bakeries/etc. They _say_
| they want that but they are not at all willing to _pay_
| for it. To be clear, I do wish those things were the
| baseline, but they are not and unfortunately it is near-
| impossible to compete with other businesses that don't
| care about those things. At the end of the day consumers
| see "$15 hamburger" vs "$10 hamburger", the better/fewer
| ingredients, the better-paid labor, the recyclable
| packaging, etc simple don't matter. This is _not_ an
| argument to underpay workers, kill the environment, and
| fill your hamburgers with sawdust, it's simply a
| statement on how hard it is to compete when consumers
| very rarely reward companies for doing things "right" no
| matter how much lip-service they pay to it.
|
| I've watched a close relative have people say "you should
| do X thing!" where X is something like "fewer
| ingredients" or "low calorie" or "healthy"-type things,
| only to see sales crater after an initial boost. People
| try it, they feel good about themselves, then they go
| right back to buying the thing packed with sugar.
|
| There is a wide gulf between "what people say that want"
| and "how they actually behave". LLMs are currently in a
| category where people can have visceral reaction and
| claim "I'd never buy something from a company that does
| that" but I can tell you right now that won't last. Be
| anti-bad-design, be anti-bad-code but don't be anti-LLM
| because that opinion isn't going to age well (and yes, I
| know _you_ simonw, aren't anti-LLM, I'm speaking
| generally).
| customguy wrote:
| > LLMs are currently in a category where people can have
| visceral reaction and claim "I'd never buy something from
| a company that does that" but I can tell you right now
| that won't last.
|
| Because people are struggling to make ends meet as wealth
| gets more and more concentrated. It reminds me of that
| really disgusting joke: why do sheep farmers like to fuck
| their sheep just at the edge of a cliff? Because they
| push back.
|
| So yeah, people often make choices they'd rather not
| make. Doesn't mean anything, just like that sheep doesn't
| love the farmer and is grinding up against him, it
| doesn't want to fall of a cliff and die.
|
| And these companies take a few cherry picked snapshots,
| never show the video, never show the aftermath, and brag
| about acceptance. Fuck all of that, so much.
|
| People don't _want_ all of humanity to be stolen from by
| companies who then turn around and sue you if you violate
| their copyright. That settles all of it, already. All
| this stuff about quality and economics is irrelevant. We
| hate people who steal from the little man to enrich the
| wealthy, always did, always will. Where there is a "we"
| that isn't just isolated people playing pretend, you will
| find this as the bedrock, maybe a layer above hating
| child abuse. And making the "accept child abuse or robber
| barons" option 10%, 20%, 50000% cheaper doesn't change
| that in the slightest.
|
| I'll go you one further: the very few ones who do, or
| don't care, don't matter, because when it comes to ethics
| and society they already checked out, and can stay
| checked out. They got old, they lost what they were
| supposed to hold on to if they ever had it, and that's
| tragic, but mostly their problem which they want to
| extend onto the people who don't have it.
| ryandrake wrote:
| > And yet... the resulting posters put me off. I'm trying
| to figure out why that is. I think the best explanation I
| have is the lack of intention behind them - knowing that
| none of the visual details - the illustrations, the
| typographic flair - had anyone thinking about them while
| they were constructed.
|
| I think that's exactly it, and it's not really hard to
| articulate. You are simply noticing the lack of effort,
| lack of care, and lack of craftsmanship that is inherent
| in AI-produced slop. This isn't mysticism and it doesn't
| take a sixth sense to detect. When someone puts no effort
| into creating something, that lack of effort _carries
| through the entire work_ , and is (or should be) obvious
| and easy to spot.
|
| Ask a schoolteacher. They can spot when someone half-
| asses a term paper, and, at least I hope, they can spot
| AI slop term papers.
| dinfinity wrote:
| Lost me at the last paragraph. Comparing billion dollar
| companies to small businesses does not make sense.
|
| The real reason for Electron apps being a thing is that
| there is very little competition where they are used. If
| chatting applications could properly communicate with
| each other based on international standards instead of
| being silos, nobody in their right mind would use the
| trash clients that Slack and Whatsapp produce, for
| instance.
| vunderba wrote:
| I called it out a while ago but the largest market to get
| destroyed by gen AI was never the professional market - it
| was the gig economy.
|
| The quality of generative AI may not be top-notch, but it
| presents an easy drop-in replacement for one-off tasks that
| people previously outsourced to platforms like Fiverr
| (voiceovers, logo design, clip art, copy editing,
| translation, etc).
| customguy wrote:
| To me nothing a human makes has the capacity to be as
| terrible on an existential level as genAI slop.
|
| > something that genuinely looks like a huge improvement to
| them
|
| Of course they think it's great, or they wouldn't be doing
| it. That goes for everyone, with anything, ever. And some
| customers probably think it's great, too. But if you want
| me as a customer, to whom all those other opinions are
| completely irrelevant, you'd be better off just putting a
| turd glazed with boogers. Doesn't matter what it
| advertises, I'll know a human made this, and look at the
| product description.
| jodacola wrote:
| My perspective on this, as someone skeptical of (but also
| bullish on) AI, is complex and I haven't completely nailed it
| down.
|
| My knee-jerk reaction is instant credibility loss for the
| business/person/thing.
|
| Follow-on is sadness (what are we losing in society because of
| this?), and curiosity: if a polished appearance (even if it is
| mega plastic) is no longer a sign of quality, then what is?
| What signals do I need to look for now?
|
| But, wait! Was a high degree of polish _ever_ truly a sign of
| quality? I 've certainly had experiences where a place made
| every effort to look polished and professional (and generally
| did a good job at it), but quality missed the mark. In the case
| of restaurants, a common refrain of mine used to be, "they're
| trying too hard in the wrong places." Now, I guess, they don't
| have to try too hard... but they're still not focusing in the
| right places.
|
| I don't know what to make of it and I go back to still trying
| to figure out new (or old?) signals for quality.
| vkou wrote:
| A high degree of polish was tangible evidence that _someone_
| in the organization gave a shit about their work.
| jodacola wrote:
| Or a third party was paid a one-time fee to make something
| look good - which still isn't a testament to the quality of
| the first party's service they're providing.
| vkou wrote:
| Sure, but it means that they managed to pick third-
| parties they work with _that give a shit_. They could
| have always picked ones that didn 't.
|
| When you're buying a pig in a poke (which is always the
| case when you're a first-time customer), this is a
| positive signal.
| fer wrote:
| I have the opposite impression. For me the quality is the
| cake; polish is just the icing. Putting out a 5-min of effort
| output with an AI as your image, is all icing and no cake: it
| has all the right proportions, layout, etc, but something is
| very wrong with it.
|
| Not sure how diffusion models work in detail so consider this
| wet neural slop, but I feel like the training data had a
| sizable portion of it of high quality art, photography,
| design, and the models captured mostly the polish: the
| crispiness, the geometry, the contrast: they're after all
| computable features. It's more difficult to capture the
| meaningful blurs, the deliberate deviations, and the organic
| rule breaking. They're properties much harder to "featurize"
| for, and rely on tags/labeling/descriptions, etc of variable
| quality.
|
| By all means you can get that with AI anyway, but it also
| requires you to understand the art itself, and describe it in
| a way the model produces satisfactory results.
| visarga wrote:
| > if a polished appearance (even if it is mega plastic) is no
| longer a sign of quality, then what is? What signals do I
| need to look for now?
|
| AI produces apparent uniformity, it makes it harder to
| distinguish the quality of the underlying process. Same thing
| happens in all fields, we are all harder to differentiate,
| then why would you pick me over the others? this is the hard
| question we are facing now, and it's a desperate situation to
| be in. Not just artists and people looking for a job, but
| also companies to their investors and products to customers.
| All harder to tell apart.
|
| I think this drives a lot of the AI craze. If I can't own my
| niche anymore, what is my new specialization? We have no
| answers yet. We have seen this kind of total competition in a
| domain with cheap imitation in SEO and slop writing.
| bigfishrunning wrote:
| I definitely roll my eyes whenever i see a poster with that
| obvious-AI-generated cartoon-people style. or the "edgy rock-
| and-roll poster" style that seems to be so prevalent. It seems
| that everyone generating posters is using the same 3 prompts!
| it's maddening.
| cautiouscat wrote:
| > The posters all look good
|
| Maybe I'm misunderstanding but I haven't seen many that I'd say
| look "good". Especially food related ones.
| matthewowen wrote:
| I was talking to my daughter a few weeks ago about a coffee
| shop that was opening soon and I said that based on the posters
| in the window it probably wouldn't be very good. She didn't
| really understand how I could draw that conclusion and I
| explained that you could tell that they had been stretched to
| fit the available dimensions in a way that clearly distorted
| the images and text. And that like... if you're careless about
| one thing like that you're probably careless about other
| things.
|
| And I think it's ultimately the same sort of thing? If in your
| marketing materials you don't value craft and you take the
| shortest path rather than embrace your constraints and produce
| something good within them, then that's maybe a negative signal
| about how you treat the thing you actually do.
|
| IME the people I know who embody great craft in a field... they
| care about it in everything they do, and they don't do a thing
| unless they can do it with care. I think sloppy AI is just a
| very strong signal of someone who doesn't follow that.
| furyofantares wrote:
| > The posters all look good - much better than their desktop
| publishing predecessors.
|
| They all look awful to me, visually extremely busy, nowhere to
| focus. The text is the same. Useless text and visual details
| everywhere, no opinion about what's important shining through,
| nothing to focus on.
| whywhywhywhy wrote:
| Clocked this a while ago, crazy how the smell of the same model
| they're using is so distinct that entire areas of town are
| starting to look homogenous.
|
| Someones definitely going to write a think piece about how this
| erases aesthetic identity of cities and cultures.
|
| Looks like absolute ass too, easily beaten even by something
| designed by someone completely naive to design/art, good sign of
| a place to avoid.
| ivan888 wrote:
| But consider how, in just a short few years, tools will have
| changed so much that even achieving this specific look will not
| even be possible (everything is in the cloud and normal users
| can't even run them locally)
|
| We'll inevitably end up feeling nostalgic for these mid-2020s
| AI slop menus, much like how graphic design of the 90s and
| 2000s is revered (see other comments on this post) even while
| during its making was regarded as garish
| mathw wrote:
| No we won't.
| mlekoszek wrote:
| Never say never. People are paying through the nose for a
| pair of JNCOs these days.
| SirFatty wrote:
| Alex, I'll take "who cares" for 200.
| diabllicseagull wrote:
| I get the consumers' ick when I see an AI-generated menu, logo,
| or sign as much as the next person. Beyond that, there is an
| argument to be made about the discrepancy between the pictorial
| depictions of a food item and what you are actually served in
| real life. I wish something akin to Japan's strict food packaging
| laws existed for restaurants.
| XorNot wrote:
| For food in addition to the false advertising it's just going
| to be the uncanny valley: there's thousands of years of
| evolutionary motivation to try and assess if food is safe. Any
| amount of "wrongness" will put people right off.
|
| There's some hot take incoming about highly processed foods,
| but the reality is that's still designed and made by humans,
| for humans, and so passes all those initial hurdles like "is
| this poison or a trap?"
|
| An image model doesn't even have that grounding.
| cautiouscat wrote:
| I have a few friends I'd describe as high up in the restaurant
| industry. They'll usually be skeptical of a menu with photos
| unless it's a mom and pop place that's been around for decades.
|
| There's a big reason more expensive restaurants don't have
| pictures on their menus, even when they're the best equipped to
| ensure your meal matches the picture.
| busymom0 wrote:
| Gordon Ramsay in many of his kitchen nightmare episodes says
| it's always a bad sign whenever a restaurant has photos on
| their menu.
| oeitho wrote:
| I'm starting to see more and more generated images of food at
| restaurants where I live, but I'm happy to say that its still
| somewhat rare.
|
| My partner and I usually just give a one star review each on
| Google when we pass by a place like this and then carry on.
| joshstrange wrote:
| Just so I have this clear, you rate a restaurant badly based on
| the pictures of the food and not the taste/flavor/etc?
|
| These places are doing their best to compete in a cutthroat
| environment with often razor-thin margins but you are willing
| to write them off and actively try to harm them for reaching
| for a tool to try and meet consumer's ever-increasing
| expectations?
|
| Just like in the native vs electron debate it's not "Beautiful
| hand-crafted native app" or "Electron wasteful trash", it's
| "Electron or nothing".
|
| I don't begrudge people at all for reaching for LLM/AI to help
| cover over what they are incapable of doing or unable to pay
| other people for. And while "anyone can take a picture" taking
| good food photography is difficult.
| mjhay wrote:
| Pictures aren't mandatory. Most restaurants don't have them.
| oeitho wrote:
| Yes.
| account42 wrote:
| He's giving the restaurant feedback that this is not what the
| customer wants, in the only meaningful way to provide
| feedback.
|
| > Electron or nothing
|
| "Nothing" is an open space for someone to provide a better
| solution so often better in the long term than a bad
| implementation.
| XorNot wrote:
| They make and sell food in an age where literally everyone
| has a high quality camera in their pocket.
|
| In their _core business_ they 're not going to show an actual
| picture of the actual product they intend to provide?
|
| In an age where people routinely tweet/Instagram/message
| pictures of their served meals?
| pibaker wrote:
| > but you are willing to write them off and actively try to
| harm them for reaching for a tool to try and meet consumer's
| ever-increasing expectations?
|
| Emotional blackmailing aside, does the consumer ever expect
| _fake_ images of the food they purchase in the menu?
| markdown wrote:
| Yes. In some countries, plastic versions of dishes are
| displayed.
| Marsymars wrote:
| > Just like in the native vs electron debate it's not
| "Beautiful hand-crafted native app" or "Electron wasteful
| trash", it's "Electron or nothing".
|
| The overwhelming majority of the total uses of Electron apps
| are going to be the same pile of apps from various megacorps
| that could fund native apps with change from their couch
| cushions.
|
| e.g. the sum total of Electron apps I use are Teams (I guess
| not quite Electron now, but close
| enough)/Slack/Discord/Android Messages/VS Code.
| kleene_op wrote:
| That's the definition of judging a book by its cover. Maybe
| they don't care about spending money on design and just want to
| focus on the food they serve, you'll never know. I would also
| probably be less inclined to enter a restaurant if I saw
| generated images advertising the food as opposed to real ones.
| But I would never ever dare put a one star review without even
| having been a customer there in the first place. I would remove
| 2 stars at most from a 5 stars review, if the food and service
| was impeccable but they ruined the settings with AI.
| oeitho wrote:
| > That's the definition of judging a book by its cover.
|
| I'm not sure whether I disagree that a menu is a book or
| whether judging a book by its cover is a bad thing in this
| instance.
|
| A menu has to list certain allergens, but not all. That would
| be inconvenient. With pictures however, people with allergies
| can more efficiently rule out or order dishes based on what
| they see.
|
| Generated images breaks with this. I've seen multiple places
| not add certain ingredients to their images that would be
| there in a photo. I think this is irresponsible. You are free
| to disagree though, but you need a proper argument if you
| want to convince us.
| varun_ch wrote:
| I'm ambivalent towards AI generated poster or other business
| design. It might leave a bad taste in my mouth but it's whatever.
| While I'm against it, I can understand why for many businesses
| it's an easy and convenient choice.
|
| What makes me feel almost physical disgust is the food in AI
| generated posters or menus. There's something deeply uncannily
| unappetizing about the food. And once I can identify it as AI
| generated, it's even worse... there's something almost creepy
| about knowing the image is a computers best approximation of
| something humans want to ingest.
|
| I cannot understand how a food establishment that takes
| themselves seriously would want to use generative assets like
| this... can't they see how unappetizing their own food looks??
| a1o wrote:
| There's a lot of times I see people reaching for AI instead of
| taking a photograph, this is super egregious when it's meant as a
| reference, because the AI generated image won't necessarily look
| like the real thing. I've seen it used in reference documents
| about animal management/veterinary reference meant for farmers,
| and the generated cows, horses and so on are just worse than the
| original version that was done with photos, they may look more
| "clean", but farm life isn't meant to be clean and it also lost
| the veterinarian that was shown in the shots manipulating the
| animal and properly indicating with hands where to pay attention
| in the animal.
| dev0p wrote:
| The loss of personality is real. The most heartbreaking ones I've
| seen are in schools, or anywhere that children are involved.
|
| For example, at my local preschool there was a wall flyer with
| information about what to bring the swimming pool. It had the
| most crudely drawn fishes and crabs and seahorses that I had ever
| seen. It was clear that whoever drew that had no prior experience
| with anything even remotely resembling a pencil, and by no metric
| one would define those drawings as "good". Maybe it was drawn by
| a janitor, or a teacher with too little time to waste on a
| drawing? Regardless, and I cannot emphasize it enough, I VASTLY
| preferred it to the new AI generated one they put up, with its
| generic AI generated marine life that one would get if they just
| typed "sea life" in the prompt. I can't tell you why myself, if
| you were to look at both versions side by side, the AI one is
| undoubtably miles better. But... it just feels wrong. Off. Out of
| place. I know I sound like a luddite, but it just doesn't look
| right. It's uncanny, and I really can't explain the reason. It's
| like seeing a perfectly drawn, realistic, anatomically accurate
| human being in an otherwise cute and cuddly children's cartoon.
| It just doesn't fit in with everything else. It's a preschool,
| it's supposed to be filled with "bad" drawings, you know?
|
| And don't get me started with the time they put up AI filtered
| group photos. I almost had a meltdown, and I'm (mostly) pro AI.
| mathw wrote:
| Also why do they have sea life in it at all, surely that's not
| something that's meant to be in the pool.
| sillyfluke wrote:
| This helped my nostalgic craving for those pedantic old
| school HN comments which I seem to see less of nowadays...But
| frankly as a kid playing in the pool often revolved around
| pretending to be some kind of sea creature.
| toilet wrote:
| Reminds me of the scene in The Social Network (2010) where
| Mark Zuckerberg points out the absurdity of playing a
| looping video of the Niagara falls in the background during
| a Caribbean themed party:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N9R8uYUXLUc
| pessimizer wrote:
| The obvious answer is because the old, crudely drawn sign did
| (and to go deeper, you'd have to ask the janitor who drew
| it.) Now it's become completely detached from its origin and
| pointless.
|
| The only reason this question is answerable is because the
| poster saw the old sign. When everybody is gone who saw the
| old sign, they'll just continue doing it for no reason. When
| somebody asks about it, some creep will babble about
| Chesterton's Fence.
| mablopoule wrote:
| Because the AI one are soul-less, and the badly drawn ones are
| not, simple as that.
| dev0p wrote:
| I'm aware of that, and it becomes extremely obvious in an
| inherently soulful context such as a preschool.
|
| Still, while "it's AI generated crap" and variations thereof
| are all perfectly valid reasons by themselves, they are way,
| WAY too shallow for the average guy who looks at both
| versions and prefers the AI one because it looks "better". I
| would probably sound crazy and/or pretentious trying to
| explain to him why I prefer the badly drawn one to the
| perfect AI generated one, I do not know exactly why myself.
| akomtu wrote:
| I think AI pictures have this soulless vibe because they are
| creations of Frankenstein: many pieces of other pictures
| stitched together in a sloppy manner. A human-made picture,
| even a bad one, is made by outlining an idea and the presence
| if this idea behind a picture is what gives it a soul,
| figuratively speaking.
| codemog wrote:
| People have posted prolific artists, called it AI, and had
| everyone hating them until the big reveal. So to be frank, it
| probably is in your head.
| unleaded wrote:
| Art has never been about the objective quality of the work
| dspillett wrote:
| _> The most heartbreaking ones I 've seen are in schools, or
| anywhere that children are involved._
|
| Not heartbreaking, but the ones that get my goat up most are
| flyers from craft fairs and worse places promising to teach
| crafts/arts. How is that not a sign to walk very quickly in the
| other direction? Or maybe it is intentional, like some bad spam
| text apparently being intentional to weed out the people who
| are less likely to fall from the scam anyway...
| boonzeet wrote:
| It doesn't seem to be as much a trend in the UK - fast food,
| takeaways etc have some leaking in of AI - but when I went to
| Korea I was blown away by how many restaurants had these AI style
| menus.
|
| It's a shame because it takes away the choice of either seeing
| the real product, or imagining it - I'm left with this shitty
| generated impression of what the food won't look like.
| zer0tonin wrote:
| Somehow in the Netherlands it seems we have mostly managed to
| escape this. But it's just because people didn't really put any
| decoration on their menus before, and no decoration is still
| cheaper than shit AI decorations.
| joshstrange wrote:
| Ok, I'll say it. I like the new menu better.
|
| I do not understand the author's aversion. Sure we can talk about
| "picture of food" vs "what was served" but have you been...
| anywhere? This is the reality of all food advertisement. I've
| never in my life been served a plate of food that perfectly
| matched the picture unless it was a user-uploaded image. Getting
| a decent idea of what the dish looks like is valuable (especially
| for unfamiliar cuisine, obviously not unfamiliar to the author
| but I'd wager unfamiliar to most patrons).
|
| Being anti-LLM/AI for the sake of it is boring. Show me mistakes
| on the menu or a level of unreality higher than the food industry
| at large and I'll care but I'm not seeing the problem here.
| mathw wrote:
| Everything looks brown, it's crammed together, those not-photos
| make it feel really cramped in the third column, it looks like
| every other AI-generated menu and it's lost the clarity the old
| menu had.
|
| And yes, there's a very long history of food places using
| unrealistic images of someone else's version of the food on the
| menus. That doesn't mean that it's okay to now use LLM versions
| of the food, because I never thought it was okay to use those
| stylised photos either.
| OtherShrezzing wrote:
| I feel like we read different articles, because without
| context, the pictured dish looked like overcooked pork chops
| served next to a type of carbonara tagliatelle topped with a
| fried egg & chives. I can't imagine anyone has ever set out to
| make spamsilog and ended up with the generated dish.
|
| It's different in kind to a "my Big Mac is more squashed than
| the advert on TV" type situation.
| bschwindHN wrote:
| > I've never in my life been served a plate of food that
| perfectly matched the picture unless it was a user-uploaded
| image
|
| You can get damn close in Japan. I've even had situations where
| the food looks _better_ than the photos.
| shibaprasadb wrote:
| The ugly designs are sadly everywhere nowadays. Saw a poster at
| my gym - gave me the ick!
| account42 wrote:
| Honestly pictures in restaurant menus have been pretty bad long
| before AI. I don't understand how it can be accepted to show a
| picture that looks nothing like the served food.
| Dwedit wrote:
| AI images (or even Stock Images) of food in a menu are false
| advertising. Full stop.
| ghm2199 wrote:
| If 1000's of years from now aliens discovers these menus while
| excavating buried human cities they will get confused about what
| evolutionary dissonance was going on looking at the phenotypical
| structure of creatures in hand drawn paintings juxtaposed with AI
| drawn menus. "Did these humans who drew these live in different
| cut off worlds that these same animals evolved to look so
| different from each other?", "Did they engage in active genetic
| engineering instead(because they lived only for a few 1000 years
| in organized societies)?" they would hypothesize and get
| confused.
|
| Future alien confusion is all that Gen-AI pictures add. There is
| no value to them that is remotely redeeming/useful to us today.
| cheesecakegood wrote:
| You might enjoy "Motel of the Mysteries" then, a large format
| illustrated paperback that I grew up with, which showed some
| hilarious conclusions about 1980s 'culture' by some future-
| millennia archaeologists. They conclude for instance that the
| TV box is an object of worship because all the architecture in
| the motel is designed around or points toward it!
| thomasikzelf wrote:
| + design looks better then the "minimal" style original
|
| - dish in the top left is not on the menu (why is it there)
|
| -- why is there a malnourished cow on the menu?
|
| ++ photos of of the product so you can see what you are gonna get
|
| --- the photos do not match the actual meal
| eloisius wrote:
| These are absolutely consuming Taipei over the last few months.
| This spring I saw an AI-generated menu for the first time, and
| then it was like overnight that now on basically every street
| there's at least one restaurant that has an AI menu, sign, or
| window dressing. It looks awful and I can't understand how anyone
| thinks it's a good idea. Noodles give me skin-crawling ants
| feeling. Chopsticks pick up tofu without pinching it, as if it's
| drawn magnetically. Spoons dip sauce from bowls that are smaller
| than the spoon.
| kylehotchkiss wrote:
| Why not just tell their staff their menu makes their food look
| disgusting and they should use the old one? No real financial
| loss and it's nice to help a small business. Owner might not know
| better or has slop reels telling them to do this
| ChrisArchitect wrote:
| Title could be " _Restaurants_ with ugly AI menu redesigns ".....
|
| Thought it was going to be something about website nav bars..
| maxglute wrote:
| Google maps needs a tool to create menu from best user submitted
| pics. Still use AI to clean up lighting, masking, layout etc, but
| there's enough data to cover most popular dishes. Feels like all
| the REAL useful data / pieces are there to solve the problem.
| Gud wrote:
| No thanks.
| GuinansEyebrows wrote:
| Outside of cheap takeout places, I neither need nor want to see
| pictures of food on menus, because I can read the menu and decide
| for myself whether I want to try something based off the
| description. I'd rather a blown out flash photo of a plate of
| noodles than a generated image though.
|
| I was under the impression that FTC laws require food
| advertisement photos to be the "real" thing. I don't know if the
| FTC covers food service but if so I wonder if they just don't
| want to bother slapping restaurants with fines over generated
| product images in menus (or if menus just aren't covered by the
| same regulation). Also I wonder if there's some grey area when it
| pertains to "photos" vs "generated images" (though the latter is
| clearly intended to stand in for the former).
| somewhereoutth wrote:
| Of course the tragedy is that the actual food had the 'AI'
| treatment years ago (in the US), the artwork is only now catching
| up.
| voidfunc wrote:
| I think its interesting how sensitive some people are to AI
| generated everything and then there's a group of people who just
| straight up don't care. No real middle ground.
| recursive wrote:
| Not caring is the middle ground.
| pessimizer wrote:
| Only if there were a group of people who were angrily
| repelled by non-AI things.
| xyzsparetimexyz wrote:
| My main problem is that AI art like this is more kitsch than a
| fucking garden gnome
| greatgib wrote:
| I wanted to be interested by the point of the author of this blog
| post, but a detail got my intention and then couldn't stop
| thinking about it:
|
| Why TF did he blur all the prices of the menu in the pictures?
| bayesnet wrote:
| I buy rice from an online store that carries speciality Japanese
| varieties. The rice is very good.
|
| But this year they replaced their previously obviously-English-
| as-second-language-but-informative descriptions with just total
| slop that say absolutely nothing at all about the rice you're
| buying. Every description is just platitudes about how good the
| rice is.
|
| So as in TFA we get people who seemingly can't resist "pressing
| the button" and getting nice shiny results even if they aren't,
| like, good. It's nuts. FWIW I emailed the rice shop and politely
| asked them to revert to the old descriptions but received no
| reply.
| joegibbs wrote:
| GPT-Image has that horrible deep-fried look to it. Can't draw
| anything without looking like it's got grit thrown over the whole
| image. Nano Banana is much, much better here, it's often hard to
| tell if it's fake.
|
| Apart from that image generation is just the wrong idea for
| flyers since the resolution they put out is never enough for 300
| DPI, the image always looks low-quality, the edges of the text
| are blurry and so on. Also the fact that the images in the
| picture look nothing like the real thing is unethical.
|
| I think you could have an AI system that makes menus correctly:
| the restaurant would take (amateur) pictures of all their menu
| items, give the system the names, descriptions, prices and so on,
| then the agent could use Nano Banana or something like that to
| give the images consistent lighting and angles, use a different
| model to remove the backgrounds and then write a menu in the
| desired sizes using HTML. That way the text could be perfect, the
| images could look like what you actually get.
| chupchap wrote:
| Restaurants used to have stock images everywhere from menus, to
| flyers, and posters. I don't remember much talk about it to the
| extent we have with AI generated images. I prefer to judge
| restaurants on the quality and taste of food, unless they're
| charging me a fine-dining rate for it.
| forgotmymain10 wrote:
| 404 Media had a great video discussing this a week ago (mostly in
| context of parties/community events and businesses)
|
| https://youtu.be/Pc_uE7JF63k?si=oY0ltoYDqU-KwL4a
| hmokiguess wrote:
| Then you realize that the next version up is there is no menu for
| the human, there's only the menu for the AI, and the menu itself
| is an AI.
| madhacker wrote:
| if the food tastes good, fugly menu can be forgiven
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2026-07-23 04:01 UTC)