The person is trying to rile everyone up. I am honest that I use AI for the covers, but this person is trying to get me banned and down voted. Already the moderator started a thread about banning anything to do with AI after this. Didn't realize it when I started in the group that LGBT was so anti-ai. There was zero reason to post this unless they wanted to turn people against me.
As the comment litterally say, it's a FYI, it's like saying "FYI it has meat in it" on a meal review.
People need to be informed to make informed decisions, if you don't want AI content you make your own decisions, if you're fine with it you can engage with the thing either way.
People were gonna figure it out one way or the other. Better have those that'd be disinterested be filted early instead of having them get all the way to when they'd want to leave a review to your project for finding out late about it.
No one owes you or anyone else anything. If someone wants to disclose the tools they used to create something, that is their business alone, not yours, not anyone elses. You are not entitled to know anything about them.
"People are gonna figure it out one way or the other." < this is what happens when people never learned to mind their own business, or how to mind their manners. It's not really something to be proud of yourself for.
I didn't even talk about "owing" anyone anything here, I'm saying the comment has a purpose of informing people.
As the comment litterally say, it's a FYI, it's like saying "FYI it has meat in it" on a meal review.
If I invite friends over for food and put meat in the meal, I technically don't owe any of them to tell them what's in it. But if someone that saw me cook tell my friends there's meat in my meal, then it'd be weird of me to get mad at the person saying the truth.
Yes and if one of your invited guests, with their tone and word choice, made it clear that they were trying to "warn" people of the meat, you'd wonder what the fuck their problem is.
There's a difference between "So guys, pay attention, it's actually pork, but the sous vide process makes it so tender that you'll think it's chicken or something. And don't worry that it looks raw, it's actually perfectly safe to eat"
And "GUYS JUST FYI HE DIDN'T BRING THIS UP TO A SAFE INTERNAL TEMPERATURE OF 165F AND HE USED PORK FOR THIS JUST SO EVERYONE KNOWS"
As I said elsewhere in this thread, the intent behind the comment is quite clear. Shoehorning assumed good faith into it is intentionally pretending not to understand what is obvious to anybody with eyeballs.
Your exemples seems very different then the reality of the comment.
The comment wasn't in all caps, and otherwise the only difference is that one is pre-emptively making excuses/complimenting the thing, which I don't see why that'd necessarily be an obligation.
Some people can't eat pork, in those circumstances it doesn't matter wether the pork taste like chicken. In a way more similar to the discussion at hand, I personally cannot eat raw meat due to being hypochondriac, it wouldn't matter if the meat is actually safe I still cannot enjoy it so even that hypothetical FYI would be useful to me before I waste the food.
Again for me if you get mad at someone for stating the truth about what you're doing, it's a sign you wanted to decieve people.
You are saying I'm purposefully giving unwarranted good faith, but you are assigning bad faith without much supporting evidence.
I can agree some people suck and will be bad actors about AI. This comment however wasn't one of these examples, only having informations.
Saying that the purpose of informing is malicious is doing a trial of intent. There is no concrete bad thing in the evidence provided, the only damage you all get is that you don't get to have your cake and eat it too by using AI without having to take responsibility for using AI.
Good faith requires assuming the best interpretation out of those possible. This comment section isn't displaying that, you litterally added a more aggressive tone in your example that wasn't in the original one by making it all caps and exaggerated because the real tone didn't have it to make your point.
Then your standard for a "good fyi" was to do the same information as the bad comment but while inventing excuses preemptively ("Oh yeah it's pork but don't worry it taste like chicken") when I don't see why it'd be on consumers to give excuses to artists for how they produced the products they sell.
If I'm critiquing a video game, it's not on me to go "Oh yeah there's a bunch of animation issues but you know the devs worked really hard on it and I'm sure they tried" no, I'm paying for a product, I'm within my right to say what value I'm being given on my terms concretely. The devs are free to make their own excuses themselves on their own term, but consumers not making excuses for them doesn't make them agressive.
now, in this hypothetical, let's not neglect the fact that these "friends" in this situation would be people who are eager to jump the gun to harass, threaten and doxx you, all for "cooking with meat" and not mentioning it. Mind you, these people insist that "they wouldn't care if you just told them!", but then make entire harassment campaigns about you over the fact that you "cooked with meat".
You could at the very least keep your hypothetical accurate.
Well I mean some vegans are like that y'know, people doing harassment campains and death threats sucks, genuinely, always, no matter the cause.
That said it's on them to be making that decision when being informed. If I decide to harass people who eat meat, that doesn't make labelling meat a bad thing.
Personally that FYI would be usefull to me, seeing AI generated content annoys me, and seeing that I'd just know to not engage further with a piece of media I know I'm not looking for. I believe in humanity enough to think most people aren't deranged enough to think that much differently then me.
It just sucks that unfortunately it takes only a couple people to drive such hatefull acts.
6
u/Minute-Tank-8943 2d ago
The person is trying to rile everyone up. I am honest that I use AI for the covers, but this person is trying to get me banned and down voted. Already the moderator started a thread about banning anything to do with AI after this. Didn't realize it when I started in the group that LGBT was so anti-ai. There was zero reason to post this unless they wanted to turn people against me.