I use gen-AI to produce images daily, but honestly the infographics are 99% terrible.

LinkedIn is filled with them now.

To be fair it hasn't made LinkedIn any worse than it already was.

To be fair, it is hard to make LinkedIn any worse.

And at the same time, its arguably the least toxic of all social networks.

Yes, cringeworthy but at least not addictive! Its like facebook all those years ago, i can IM friends from highschool without having to pay any attention to the feed.

>And at the same time, its arguably the least toxic of all social networks.

Its "non toxic" insofar as people refuse to risk discussing controversial non employment related topics.

Its super toxic insofar as "10 ways to herd your HR cattle to the productivity slaughterhouse" is just an average, uncontroversial self promo article.

You may be on to something there!

Perhaps the solution to breaking the destruction of society via engagementmaxxing may be to make things cringeworthy!

I was gonna make a joke about "Wish granted, now Microsoft owns it" but then I remembered that they already do. Reality sometimes makes better jokes than what we can come up with.

Infographics and full presentations are a NanoBananaPro exclusive so far.

You should see some of the work from their PaperBanana papers. Really solid.

Informatics are as bad as the author allows though. There's few people who could make or even describe a good infographic, so that's what we see in the results too.

Correct.

Much like the pointless ASCII diagrams in GitHub readmes (big rectangle with bullet points flows to another...), the diagrams are cognitive slurry.

See Gas Town for non-Qwen examples of how bad it can get:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46746045

(Not commenting on the other results of this model outside of diagramming.)

> cognitive slurry

Thank you for this phrase. I don't think that bad diagrams are limited to the AI in any way and this perfectly describes all "this didn't make things any clearer" cases.