AI Derangement Syndrome / Anti-AI artists / Pro-AI technocultists / AI "debate" communities - The Natural Retardation in the Artificial Intelligence communities

  • 🏰 The Fediverse is up. If you know, you know.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
gagabobo1997 said:
These Anti-AI artists (often called "antis") are also known for being quite violent, talking about their utter hatred for and drawing pictures of violent acts being committed towards AI users. This violence and hatred towards AI users (who they lovingly call AI bros) is a common theme.
1722806309694.png a
1722806385809.pnga
1722806475060.pngA
Click to expand...
DOIT.png
 
Some thoughts on the subject. A lot of lefty types will reflexively go for arguments related to intellectual property. This is retarded because
1. This would imply they wouldn't be complaining if the ai was only trained off of public domain works and art they had the rights to, but they wouldn't
2. A lot of the lefty types don't even believe in intellectual property to begin with.

It's a really annoying kind of hypocrisy, t's a lot of overlap with this crop of people who believe the author is dead but also start crying about how you don't have "media literacy" if you don't agree with the author. The rest of the arguments I see about AI are either general leftist luddite and anti-capitalist talking points or low talent artists using it as a scapegoat for why they are failing. It's reminiscent of the old "art is suffering" cope

What annoys me most about it though is that there is an actual good much easier argument to make against this shit: It's fucking slop and I'm tired of seeing it. Like holy fuck if I see one more person shitting up an imageboard with one of these square resolution images with the same uncanny lighting and when you call them out for how shit it looks they go on some delusional rant about how you must secretly be a professional artist who is jealous that in 2 years they will be able to type in a sentence to generate an entire video game from scratch. Those types and every big tech website randomly adding an AI button somewhere on every page just piss me off enough to outweigh the joy I get from watching hack artists cope and seethe

Also I must add: Glorious 'sharty is 99% human drawn art
 
Fuck it, I'm contributing this here.
dick brain said:
He made a big "erm ackshually" comment on my profile because I negrated a post about the valuable insight he has gathered on the artistic process via his extensive experience sitting with his dick in his hand asking Siri to show him pictures of fat dragons farting.
Click to expand...
I understand there are differences in "real" art versus AI generated imagery, but I will absolutely argue that both methods benefit from use of real-life models for the purposes of generating accurate anatomy.

Source: My use of my favorite BBW, SSBBW, and USSBBW models for accurate anatomy for my fat pink-haired female dragons.

I do not care if my post constitutes pro-AI art autism. Hand me your finest top hats and your finest puzzle pieces.
 
I will add that a majority of the people complaining about AI are either, well, shitty drawers or fetish artists, and while the 2 very much overlap to the point where its one circle from afar, there are ones on the edge that are actually talented. Especially on DA it seems: people destroy their entire gallery in "protest" to DA, when I guess it also could be an convenient way to run back into their hugboxes. Even a few furry artists are running for the grounds, primarily since there was a recent video ad showcasing this furry AI artist making more money than they ever had, and then basically snapped.

Trust me when I say these people want all the attention and all the money to themselves, and once AI became popular and powerful enough to threaten them, they suddenly realize they couldn't win against an emotionless creator machine so they pulled out every stop they can think of but can't admit that they are fucking pussies who just want money because they're greedy.
 
Danann said:
I will add that a majority of the people complaining about AI are either, well, shitty drawers or fetish artists
Click to expand...
Interestingly, the majority of foss AI image users are also fetish artists!

edit: and that probably is what causes alot of the vitriol from traditional fetish artists; why pay $50 for your fursona wearing a diaper when you can generate one for free?
 
Last edited:
gagabobo1997 said:
Interestingly, the majority of foss AI image users are also fetish artists!

edit: and that probably is what causes alot of the vitriol from traditional fetish artists; why pay $50 for your fursona wearing a diaper when you can generate one for free?
Click to expand...
Aside from whatever fees some of the models require...but then again, they're usually shittier than the FOSS models I believe. Ironically, DreamUp, DA's own AI tool, had pissed off the first wave of these traditionalists off the platform...assuming they didn't left already because they discovered Twitter/Pixiv and their lax removal policies...and the thing is really shitty and only has a limited amount of uses unless you pay for their premium membership, 3 levels worth because Wix, the Israeli tech company that owns them, wants to make positive income with their shitty attempt to create an ArtStation clone.
 
AnimeSucksCopeAndSneed said:
Fuck it, I'm contributing this here.

I understand there are differences in "real" art versus AI generated imagery, but I will absolutely argue that both methods benefit from use of real-life models for the purposes of generating accurate anatomy.

Source: My use of my favorite BBW, SSBBW, and USSBBW models for accurate anatomy for my fat pink-haired female dragons.

I do not care if my post constitutes pro-AI art autism. Hand me your finest top hats and your finest puzzle pieces.
Click to expand...
This isn't even pro-AI autism. This is just extreme autism.
 
The Thinking Abacus said:
This isn't even pro-AI autism. This is just extreme autism.
Click to expand...
Literally any artist can tell you that art is made through models. This is the whole reason why people are going after shadman, it's because the only way he can create the art that he does is because he definitely has CP on his hard drive for reference material.

Top hats, please.
 
AnimeSucksCopeAndSneed said:
the only way he can create the art that he does is because he definitely has CP on his hard drive for reference material.
Click to expand...
I hate shadman as much as the next kiwi but I don't think the ONLY way to draw loli porn is to have real CP for reference. The same way an AI model can produce CP by just combining the concepts of children and porn without needing tagged CP in the training data.
 
gagabobo1997 said:
The same way an AI model can produce CP by just combining the concepts of children and porn without needing tagged CP in the training data.
Click to expand...
Perhaps (I'm not about to go experiment to find out), but by and large, any loli porn made with AI will absolutely use "child, loli, young" in the positive prompts. Maybe it doesn't need a child lora, but you can absolutely ask AI to generate a child without any additional Laura's. You just specify it in the prompt. If you go to /g/ and toss any of the AI lolis into the PNG info tab in SD, I guarantee you "child, loli, young" are in the positive prompts.

But giving that Shadman doesn't use ai, I absolutely believe that he does have child porn on his drive. It makes too much sense. I also believe he absolutely does have general CSAM on there also. Maybe he's not referencing actual kids (this is fucking optimistic), but I believe he references CSAM.

I won't derail this any further, I'll just finish this off by saying any artist (traditional or AI) that wants accurate anatomy wants reference material.
 
Maybe it's just me, but I've been noticing a pattern between the terminally online anti-ai activists and frauds that just talk about art community drama on Twitter all day rather than making actual art.
 
KrotchyKun666 said:
Maybe it's just me, but I've been noticing a pattern between the terminally online anti-ai activists and frauds that just talk about art community drama on Twitter all day rather than making actual art.
Click to expand...
The online art "community" has always been mostly dramalords, grifters, and donut steel nonsense.
 
gagabobo1997 said:
People talking about AI CP being a major problem tend to conveniently forget that human artists have made millions of images of loli and shota porn, some of it realistic, and there's been no major push to regulate the tools they use to make it. On the reddits they often say "but AI makes it easier to make realistic child porn!" also ignoring the fact that Photoshop, cameras, even pens and pencils make it easier to make unsavory art as well.
I've always thought about it like gun control. Reasonable people blame the person misusing the gun/AI but leftists blame the gun/AI itself.
Click to expand...
The way I've seen this argued is that AI generated images from CSAM still technically use said material as reference, therefore an actual child is still being exploited and that still technically needs more exploitation to work. AI models essentially generate a seed based on images and keywords if I recall correctly, which seems somewhat similar to the AI models that big tech companies (Microsoft, Google, etc) use to detect known CSAM hashes.

The difference between drawn shit and that is that you can technically make the former without any sort of reference point. At the point where these AI model makers reference that kind of material is when it's no longer just loli/shota stuff.

I likewise don't consider 3D porn or Shadman stuff as such, because there's no stylization (I need to think of a better way of wording this), and it's blatant that weebs aren't the target audience. Speaking on semantics, the 3DCG porn and Shadman is what actually violates obscenity laws.
 
KrotchyKun666 said:
The way I've seen this argued is that AI generated images from CSAM still technically use said material as reference
Click to expand...
I would have to see some hard data to support this. Models can generate novel concepts by combining concepts it already 'knows' about, so I have a feeling that an AI model trained on fully 100% legal stuff with no CSAM in the training data will still be able to produce CSAM by simply combining things it already knows about (i.e. porn and children). Humans can draw loli art while never looking at CSAM, I see no reason why an image model couldn't. The main problem is testing would require generating or at least attempting to generate a bunch of AI CP which most researchers probably don't want to do.
And again it comes down to the fact that it doesnt matter if the model CAN generate illegal stuff, it matters if someone uses it to generate illegal stuff. Goes back to the gun control argument of whether or not tools are responsible for someone misusing them.
KrotchyKun666 said:
AI models essentially generate a seed based on images and keywords if I recall correctly,
Click to expand...
The models do generate seeds for diffusion, but it's not based on the images and keywords, it's just randomly generated so that you get different results. Whereas photoDNA (which has dubious efficacy) has visual hashes actually based off of the content of the image for detecting CSAM.
 
Soyjak Enjoyer said:
Some thoughts on the subject. A lot of lefty types will reflexively go for arguments related to intellectual property. This is retarded because
1. This would imply they wouldn't be complaining if the ai was only trained off of public domain works and art they had the rights to, but they wouldn't
2. A lot of the lefty types don't even believe in intellectual property to begin with.
Click to expand...
Ask the same people how they feel about either shoplifting or piracy, they will defend either but go through mental gymnastics to justify why AI is worse than the other.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom