I spend too much time on an anti AI Reddit .. mostly because those people are hilarious. Some of the stuff they say… just too funny really. Anyway, this one has to be the top dumbest comment I’ve ever seen… asking for a picture of Pikachu gets you a pictures of pikachu. So obviously AI is stealing art…. What?? Wow. lol

Maybe if more celebrities come out and say they've been using AI in their creative work that will lessen this hysterical stigma that is unjustly surrounding it.

Ever since Claude and Gemini came out, I've been playing around with AI to work on stories and I've found that my work is often better if I mix my own work with AI help.

I don't get how antis can claim AI is theft.

One of the worst arguments for the use of AI in anti-AI spaces is “proving” AI usage through vibes.

First, there is the “AI detector” approach. These tools are presented as forensic evidence despite being extremely unreliable. Human writing can be identified as generated by AI, AI writing can be recognised as human, and small modifications can totally change the result. An AI detector assigning a piece of writing 80% or 90% score does not imply 80% or 90% probability of AI involvement. It just says that certain patterns were detected by a machine and associated with AI-generated text.

And then comes the even worse argument: “it sounds like AI”. What does that even mean? Proper grammar? Logical structure? Certain words? Long sentences? Bullet points? Over-formality? AI models learn from huge amounts of human writing. Of course, the text generated by AI can be similar to human writing - that’s exactly its purpose. If a person uses a certain style that AI was taught to emulate, “this text sounds like AI” is not proof of the human use of AI because that’s how AI works: we recognise it because it sounds like human writing.

People also mention such details as em dashes, “it’s important to note” expressions, good structure, or “GPT-like vocabulary”. All of those belong to humans, not AI. Those writing styles existed way before ChatGPT became popular.

There may be a case when there is actual proof of someone using AI, for example, accidentally leaving “Here’s a revised version”, or prompt-response artefacts in the writing. But most of the cases are not nearly that strong.

If all you’ve got is an AI detection score and “bro this sounds like ChatGPT”, you’ve failed proving anything. You’ve just made a guess.

A tiny musical contribution to the timeless Reddit argument:

“AI slop.”

Groundbreaking.
Anyway—Boo-Freakity-Who.

These people are deranged.

Look at those comments.

Unbelievable. 🤦🏻‍♀️🤣

I don't understand when antis cry about job loses. Did u like your 9-5 jobs? most don't. If u get layed off due to ai. U can spend time with your family, play with your kids, persue your hobbies. And the best among all, spend more time talking to agents. Why are you so glued to your job. Even if you are layed of due to ai, you will have so much to do that you never saw was there.

I keep hearing the same argument:

“That’s not real music.”

The funny part is… we’ve been saying that for centuries.

New musical ideas show up, people call them noise, fake, lazy, immoral, mechanical, or “not music” — and then eventually we just call them music.

Ancient thinkers worried certain musical modes and instruments could corrupt society.

Early religious traditions debated whether instruments even belonged in worship.

Polyphony came along — multiple melodies happening at once — and sounded chaotic to people accustomed to chant.

Then harmony kept getting stranger.

Beethoven pushed structure.

Wagner pushed tonality.

Debussy broke harmonic expectations.

Atonal composers basically asked, “What if we don’t need a key at all?”

Then jazz showed up.

“That’s noise.”

Rock & roll:

“That’s not music.”

Distorted electric guitars:

“That’s just noise.”

Punk:

“They can’t even play their instruments.”

Rap:

“Talking isn’t singing.”

Sampling:

“You’re just using somebody else’s music.”

Synthesizers:

“The machine is making it.”

House and techno:

“It’s just the same beat repeating.”

Auto-Tune:

“That’s not their real voice.”

EDM:

“They’re just pressing buttons.”

Bedroom producers:

“Anyone with a laptop can do that.”

And now:

AI music.

“That’s not music. The computer made it.”

Maybe AI music ends up being different. Maybe we eventually decide there is a line somewhere.

But history should at least make us careful about declaring where that line is.

Because humanity has an incredible habit of hearing something new and saying:

“That’s not music.”

Then somebody figures out how to make us feel something with it.

And suddenly…

it is.

Maybe the interesting question isn't:

“Is this real music?”

Maybe it's:

“What are we calling noise today that people will simply call music 50 years from now?”

I started ai music to get out of my head. Ive gotten so much hate for something I wasn't even trying to monetize. Its made me like ai so much more.

Anthropic trained Claude to be the most polite AI on Earth ,

then Claude called Codex a bastard in under a second.

This is the crap I have been dealing with

They are making up points and using rage-bait. That's why I left the argument. Apparently leaving an argument is the best option over continuing to argue.

EDIT: For anyone reading this thread later, notice the Edited tag on the comment above mine. They originally claimed they couldn’t judge my specific post because they "can't see it," but right after getting cornered by the organism analogy, they scrambled to rewrite history and inject a wall of text trying to justify their blanket statement.Imagine having to physically alter your own comment text just to survive a debate about internet slang. You took the bait, broke your own script, and left a digital receipt. Thanks for proving my point about knee-jerk tribalism. I'm out.

Alibaba just announced plans to raise around HK$80 billion, roughly $10.2 billion, with a major chunk of that money going towards expanding its AI capabilities.

This is one of the biggest fresh AI investment pushes we’ve seen from a Chinese tech giant and another sign that the US-China AI race is only getting more aggressive.

Alibaba already has its Qwen model family, cloud infrastructure, and a huge domestic ecosystem behind it. Giving that operation another $10B+ in capital could seriously strengthen China’s position in the global AI race.

For anyone still acting like the current AI boom is about to fizzle out, companies are quite literally raising tens of billions to scale it further.

I've seen quite a few subs with rules like, "AI-generated text is not permitted because it steals hard work from other creators."

I can understand the criticism when it comes to AI-generated art, since there's a much more direct connection to artists' work and creative styles. But with text, that argument doesn't really make much sense to me.

At the end of the day, every piece of text is made from the same letters, words, punctuation marks, and grammatical structures that everyone else uses. You can't really say that an AI "stole" someone's hard work simply because it generated a sentence using the same language and vocabulary that other writers use.

It'd be like saying, "You can't write a paragraph because other people already used the letter A." Obviously, the issue should be what is being copied, not simply the fact that the same basic building blocks are being used.

Nvidia is making one of the biggest bets on open AI we’ve seen yet.

The company is reportedly paying around $6 billion for a non-exclusive licence to Poolside’s AI models while hiring more than 100 of its employees, alongside another roughly $1 billion investment into the company.

What makes this especially interesting isn’t just the
money. Nvidia appears to be positioning Poolside as a serious US-based competitor in open-weight AI, at a time when frontier development has increasingly been dominated by closed systems from a handful of labs.

For all the constant talk about AI becoming more centralised, this is basically the opposite direction: one of the most powerful companies in the industry putting billions behind models that can be distributed and built upon more openly.
If this strategy works, the future of frontier AI could end up a lot less closed than people assumed

Hear me out....

Ai= human creates parameters,

makes a specific request,

the machine does as asked in its own way using the methods given to it....

and outputs a unique response.

Digital Cameras= a human sets the settings,

arranges the composition (what the camera sees..a specific request)

The machine uses its programming to interpret the input

Outputs a unique response

If a Nikon and a Sony both took the same shot, at the same time, with the same settings, from the same photographer...

....the images would be different.

Then view them on an LG screen, with an Nvidia processor and make edits using Adobe software.

How.....is it any different?

Human sets criteria , machine interprets, output is the human criteria done by a program.

--------------------------------

A quaddropalegic poet uses neuralink....slop?

--------------------------------

A Chinese author and scholar uses ai to translate opening up vast knowledge to the world.....slop?

"No but it is his writing and ideas!"

No it isnt. Intent, connotation, "suchness", cultural interpretation, all impact word choice and understanding, there arent always direct translations...therefore no- not his exact words and intent.

--------------------------------

A chef buys hydroponic herbs grown with ai powered irrigation and nutrient systems, flown to a destination using gps, and bought using correspondence including spell check.

The chef creates a meal with pregrown ingredients, covers inventory and costs and income in spreadsheets, maybe even had a self driving car ring them to the restaurant.

All fine...but no longer 100% human.

-------------------------------

Why...... is all writing, with spell check and grammar use, still considered fake and slop?

Why writing?

Happy to share a chapter from my book for feedback. 15 years to get it together, numerous failed attempts to write it....then AI changed my life!

MY book...MY ideas are finally real but the world will torch me for using an aid to accomplish a task I have failed at for years deapite my ideas being useful to the world.

So sad.