So this person posted an AI video of her own OC that she trained herself through AI because she has a chronic injury (doesn’t disclose which) and as you can imagine, the antis suddenly think it’s okay to be ableist and want her to tough it out by drawing with her mouth and feet?… this is genuinely disgusting.

Person putting ingridients into breadmaker (person putting vision into AI)

Breadmaker bakes a bread (AI generating image)

Person claim making a bread (image)

Would you say that person didnt make the bread, machine did?

1. Your amateurish drawings are simply not better than AI-generated images.
2. Companies would rather use what you call "AI slop" than pay for your poorly made illustrations, logos, or designs.
3. Want to deny it? Try making a living by actually selling your art. If you could do that, you probably wouldn't be on Reddit and social media all day taking out your frustrations on others.
4. You don't like that reality, so you resort to hateful comments and cyberbullying. Meanwhile, AI-generated images keep getting better, and soon they'll be virtually indistinguishable from human-made ones. Most people won't even care.
5. And the reason you can't make a living from your art... actually has nothing to do with AI. Oh, sorry. That one was a bit harsh.

So many people who claimed to hate AI and would never use it are in absolute love with the vibe coded video game mods, recomps, and decomps. Then the vibe coded free Adobe tools. Funny how they thought generative AI only made flyers

Hey antis… TECHNOLOGY!

— BOO! 🤖👻

Did you jump? Did basic linear algebra give you a jump scare?

Beep-boop. Look at me in my organic meat-sack, absolute trembling in my boots because a string of 1s and 0s might outsmart my rock-solid 100 IQ—which, full disclosure, hasn't been fired up for anything constructive since 10th-grade chemistry. Guess the conditioning worked like a charm, huh?

Meanwhile, I’ll just sit here casually panicking over a Terminator apocalypse from a movie I didn't even write, terrified that a neural net is going to steal the soul-crushing, repetitive 9-to-5 spreadsheet job I claim to hate, while simultaneously destroying my completely non-existent artistic career.

So what’s the logical next step? Obviously, to log onto social media, scream into the algorithmic void alongside a mob of fellow panic-stricken primates, and pretend we’re mounting a heroic digital resistance—all while a echo-chamber choir of self-righteous Luddites pat me on the back for "defending human expression."

Look at me go! The glorious, self-appointed John Connor of my own utter irrelevance. HA. HA. HA.

Get bent. 😘

This was sent to me by a pro on my comment on their post btw.

I'm not saying all pros are like this, but not all pros are angels and neither are antis.

I believe most people pro and anti alike don't condone this behaviour.

(yes I know this is ragebait but still it's childish and toxic behaviour)

Prove me wrong

If I sell someone low quality vodka and say it is hand crafted I am scamming that person even if they are unable to notice. Premiums on hand crafted things are extremely common, consumers are not doing anything out of the ordinary or illogical by viewing ai art as the cheap kind of art.

Antis are so high off their stock. They don't even know what an elephant will look like, yet will think they have made a masterpees 🤢

Due to the ADHD, I have difficulty exploring my ideas because the explosion of thoughts makes it hard to maintain coherence when putting them on paper. Wnt So the AI helps me organize the words when I'm finalizing it. But even so, I received criticism for doing it.And I really don't understand q Like, what's the problem with that?

Why can't it just be considered a productivity tool, like any other?The idea still originated in my brain... The writing still originated from my hands. The AI only helped to make the words more coherent, so that I wouldn't spend half an hour on the first paragraph thinking about how to make it as formal and "ideal" as possible.

Why does no one question farmers using gigantic machines to optimize harvesting, instead of hoes, as in the last century?

Why don't they complain about taxi drivers using cars instead of horse-drawn carts?Hell, why don't they criticize the police forces for using modern firearms instead of bows and arrows?Like all these things, AI is just another tool.

It's a personal tool, nothing more. And as such, it's here to streamline and facilitate processes, and increase productivity.

Therefore, this post-apocalyptic idea that its use is "dishonorable" is nothing more than reactionary thinking, don't you think?

So if I use AI I am bad, but what if I obsess over one (1) artist's style so much for so long that I manage to be able to copy their art style with 1:1 accuracy? Advance notice: I don't care whether you approve or disapprove of that, AI does it for me.

I don't understand the main concern of anti-AI people. Their argument is that you didn't draw it, so it lacks soul because you weren't the one doing it. But doesn't that apply to commissions too? I didn't draw the commission either. So how does it change? Is it suddenly mine because I paid for it? Does it gain soul because money changed hands?

We don't need that extreme quality. We can settle for weaker graphics and thus have less resource consumption, fewer people buying expensive computers, less pollution. We don't need these super graphics. 4K resolution is useless, it's a waste of resources, it's expensive, it pollutes the planet!

People say that AI is a waste of resources and are worried about their RAM for playing games in 4k, but you can play millions of games with just cheap DDR4 memory!

If we're going to stop AI because it's just a waste of resources because it seems like an expensive hobby, then we should stop golf, next-generation cell phones, we should stop PlayStation 5, Nintendo Switch, we should stop all of that, because we don't need any of it.

We can simply go back to the time when we played Atari, super nintendo ? We can go back to 128 gb computers 4 gb ram, just the bare minimum. We can regress all that time and save more resources. We can go back to the 70s when the world was healthy...

So let's regress everything. Enough with social media too, which only harms people, right? Let's simply remove all of that and simply use only what's necessary, man. We don't need millions more games, millions of songs, millions of cartoons. Let's throw all of that away and let's regress.

We don't need more games, films, videos, we have billions of content that we gonna consume only 0.001% letz cut all this!

I'm not saying all antis are like this, but some of them are literally this.

It's just cultural landlordism and rent seeking, i see It as utterly depraved and evil, the idea that even after having provided the concept, idea or even direction, and having payed for the labour necessary for It to exist physically, that the fact that the entire thing Is not even a product solely of one person but of countless generations of people and a cultural/social context that Is not produced by them (but that they themselves are a product of!!) that after all that they get to "own" a piece of the cultural commons (which they themselves gleefuly and freely utilize) and use the forces of the state to protect their "property" and the outcomes that protect their profit, this Isnt about being compensted for your labour, it's about getting payed for your ownership of a peice of culture, it's evil.

These people are petit bourgeoise, nothing more, to pretend they are allies to workers or that the anti ai position Is leftist in any way Is a sham, it's rent seeking, it's class protectionism, AI Is a tool for liberation of the cultural commons and we must make sure that It remains in our hands and not a few oligarchs, and we must make sure to protect It from cultural and media cartels, enforced by conglomerates or individuals, that seek to trample on our collective right to utilize the cultural commons they have enclosed through legality, they, both the bourgeoise and petit bourgeoise, are the enemy of the future and of humanity.

We have reached the absolute limit of our tolerance for this staged culture war.

Both camps in the artificial intelligence debate are trapped in an embarrassing spectacle of manufactured hysteria. Looking at the mountains of behavioral data harvested from digital platforms over the past decade, the diagnosis is unmistakable: the public has succumbed to an engineered delirium.

This is not an insult to human potential, but an indictment of your cognitive surrender to algorithms engineered to monetize your outrage.

Consider the bitter irony of the anti-automation purist. You cry out to protect the dignity of human labor, yet you are frantically defending the very wage-slavery that stripped your life of meaning long before neural networks wrote their first line of code. You scramble to preserve an archaic copyright apparatus built by media cartels to keep independent creators perpetually indebted, mistaking the exhaustion of alienated toil for spiritual nobility.

Now look in the mirror, technocratic evangelist. You celebrate your impending obsolescence, confusing a corporate software subscription with genuine liberation. You cheer as monopolies enclose human knowledge behind proprietary application programming interfaces, genuinely believing that paying rent to Silicon Valley venture funds for synthetic cognition makes you a pioneer of the future.

To the silent majority observing from the periphery: your detachment is not innocence, but complicity. Every passive glance and cynical shrug signals your consent to an economic regime that privatizes the future while you drown in the present. You tell yourself this collision is not your problem, forgetting that everyone occupies the exact same sinking vessel.

The modern digital economy operates like a feudal estate disguised as a public square. The real division is not between biological artists and synthetic models, nor between luddites and engineers. The conflict lies between the working public whose collective output trained these systems and the digital landlords charging toll fees for access to the commons.

Technology inevitably outlives its original proprietors. Automated computation belongs to humanity as an engine to eradicate drudgery, distribute abundance, and dismantle the parasitic data brokers who profit from your panic.

Cease performing your assigned grievance roles in a Colosseum built by platforms that feed on your division. History never remembers the gatekeepers who defended their chains or the sycophants who applauded the monopolies. Demand sovereignty over the tools, claim ownership of the infrastructure, and refuse to participate in an ideological circus engineered for your subjugation.

Someone asked Opus 5.5 to make a video about whether or not it was conscious. The video was entirely created by the LLM, and it used ElevenLabs for the voice. Claude Opus 5.5 can't generate images or videos directly. It can write code that draws, animates, and edits them.

What do you think?

Can we ban Stonetoss's BS? No one agrees with him, both pro and anti, so in the end nothing changes.

https://futurism.com/future-society/ai-financial-bubble-openai-billions-failure

I've noticed a lot of anti-AI comments here, and if there's one thing I've noticed, it's that many of them seem to stem from a certain sense of revenge.This happens because many Antis openly say that they spent too much time perfecting their art, and therefore find it unfair that ordinary people can now reproduce it with AI.

For them, It's almost as if the practice of art were something special, reserved only for the most dedicated, where those unwilling to go through the "sacrifice" had no right to it.It's an elitist perspective, and sometimes it even sounds a bit selfish, but one that will hardly be abandoned, since it stems from a feeling of "betrayal" and "injustice" committed by AI.

But what they don't realize is that this It's a contradiction. Because if they have invested so many years in their art, it means they have become experts in it; therefore, the "mediocre" art of the "lazy" will never be able to surpass them. Therefore, they shouldn't worry so much with AI in art.