If it adds to the content, then it is worth something. So make someone worth something.
If it doesn’t matter, add a random screenshot of kernel code.
The “worth something” doesn’t even have to be financial.
Find a nice image that someone has made which is linux-related, and ask if you can use it & credit the author.
If no, try someone else.
If that’s too much work, use a random screenshot of kernel code …
There are artists out there that have already freely shared some really cool art, that would love to be able to point to publications that they have permitted to use it.
If you have some budget, pay them. Value the time involved.
Just not AI filler BS. I’m not going to see some filler AI art and go “oh yeh, I’m going to use that for X/Y/Z”.
But if I see some cool art, I’m inclined to commission something for an actual use case
Just not AI filler BS. I’m not going to see some filler AI art and go “oh yeh, I’m going to use that for X/Y/Z”.
But if I see some cool art, I’m inclined to commission something for an actual use case
does the art (be it ai or made by human) adds to the content or is it superfluous? If true, then why even bother with ai slop as a cover image?
It’s mainly for Open Graph (the thumbnail you see when you share the website on social media), and it’s good for SEO or engagement in general.
There are plenty of already existing images for this they could reuse. For example:
a banner for the website as a whole is the obvious choice imo
I saw one on another article here that was just a stock image of some penguins, I rather liked that.
The art of clipart composition seems to be a lost art :(
If it adds to the content, then it is worth something. So make someone worth something.
If it doesn’t matter, add a random screenshot of kernel code.
The “worth something” doesn’t even have to be financial.
Find a nice image that someone has made which is linux-related, and ask if you can use it & credit the author.
If no, try someone else.
If that’s too much work, use a random screenshot of kernel code …
There are artists out there that have already freely shared some really cool art, that would love to be able to point to publications that they have permitted to use it.
If you have some budget, pay them. Value the time involved.
Just not AI filler BS. I’m not going to see some filler AI art and go “oh yeh, I’m going to use that for X/Y/Z”.
But if I see some cool art, I’m inclined to commission something for an actual use case
This is the way
You’ve set up a bit of a word-trap because that ‘true’ can cover for either of your cases. I can’t know what you mean.
If it adds nothing, why does it matter? If it adds something, why do you care?
What are you actually upset about?
I am upset that ai imagery was used. That it was used for something utterly pointless like a cover image makes this even more egregious.
It also just flies in the face of open-source, to use what was likely a closed-source image genAI to produce the image.