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

[The Lawgiver]

Youtube keeps recommending me this vid so now you all have to see it.

Guy gets super fucking preachy over what's blatantly an intentional uncanny ai image type visual gag in an already clearly low fucking budget spongebob sports commentary comedy thing on a TV network

 

[Markass the Worst]

Guy gets super fucking preachy over what's blatantly an intentional uncanny ai image type visual gag in an already clearly low fucking budget spongebob sports commentary comedy thing on a TV network

Sperg has a thread in PG.

 

[The Lawgiver]

Sperg has a thread in PG.

yes I know, but this is specific to this thread.

 

[Markass the Worst]

yes I know, but this is specific to this thread.

I wasn't telling you to move there, just letting others know.

 

[Miss Violet Beauregarde]

Found out that people really tried to ban  all ai usagehttps://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/704291

 

[Aquarius]

Annoying prostitute whines about AI pornography:

Spoiler: Screenshot

Source is here, and an archive is available here.

Transcript:

I absolutely judge models who have sold out to Al (you are apart of the problem and it's not cute)

Support REAL models. Support Independent creators. Preserve porn. Keep it human. Keep it real.

Posted on Jan 28, 2025, at 12:16 PM, to 1,723 views, 2 comments, 2 reblogs, and 40 likes.

So, we have a woman who commodifies herself, her body, and, inadvertently, women as an entire caste. She expects the men who use her body as a masturbatory aide will care about her when a cheaper and more bespoke alternative appears.

She also implies that porn was real, and it never was. Films like Deep Throat were filmed in the context of violent, domestic abuse - but the camera angles don’t betray that truth, do they? Camera angles are the basis of simulated sex. Pornographers back in the 1970s rubbed vaseline on the lens, and pornographers now wear fake penises. It was always bullshit, but those prior lies didn’t cut into her bottom line.

 

[linchan]

A minor update on copyright as it pertains to AI generated works. While this is an official statement from the Copyright Office, it doesn't make much of a dramatic change in either direction, as the copyright office determined for this time they do not think the new technology demands new legislation or policies. So no one gets full AI protection, no style protection for artist, but this isn't the Total AI Death people thought the copyright office would lay down on the industry.

I dont want to overhype this decision on either side because this merely expresses the most moderare compromise for both sides. Pure AI generated images do not qualify for copyright, but it can qualify if it was modified afterwards, even with AI tools. The article references the usage of de-ageing tools, or rotoscoping that is common place in the industry that benefits from development of AI.

While this clarifies the copyright protection of AI outputs, there is yet to be a statement on the infringement status of its inputs. So the fight hasn't been settled there, frankly not much was settled with this statement and we shouldn't expect it to be settled for the time being. This isn't a clear cut victory for either side.

https://variety.com/2025/biz/news/copyright-ai-tools-filmmaking-studios-office-1236288969/

 

[Monolith]

Annoying prostitute whines about AI pornography:

Spoiler: Screenshot

View attachment 6920268

Source is here, and an archive is available here.

Transcript:

Posted on Jan 28, 2025, at 12:16 PM, to 1,723 views, 2 comments, 2 reblogs, and 40 likes.

So, we have a woman who commodifies herself, her body, and, inadvertently, women as an entire caste. She expects the men who use her body as a masturbatory aide will care about her when a cheaper and more bespoke alternative appears.

She also implies that porn was real, and it never was. Films like Deep Throat were filmed in the context of violent, domestic abuse - but the camera angles don’t betray that truth, do they? Camera angles are the basis of simulated sex. Pornographers back in the 1970s rubbed vaseline on the lens, and pornographers now wear fake penises. It was always bullshit, but those prior lies didn’t cut into her bottom line.

Here's my best shot at DignifAI-ing her. Unfortunately, there's only so much our machine overlords can do to a thot this undigified.

 

[Loris Yeltsin]

So, we have a woman who commodifies herself, her body, and, inadvertently, women as an entire caste. She expects the men who use her body as a masturbatory aide will care about her when a cheaper and more bespoke alternative appears.

To be fair, I'd argue that a certain demographic really will care. I mean, I don't know what flavor of online prostitute this particular woman is, but I've always been under the impression that a major appeal of sites like OnlyFans was the parasocial aspect of interacting with the prestigious "content creators", not just the porn itself (even if said interaction is largely one-sided).

If anything, the threat of AI is a fantastic opportunity for all e-whores to do SUPPORT REAL VAGEEN campaigns and fleece their already emotionally attached simps.

 

[Aquarius]

To be fair, I'd argue that a certain demographic really will care. I mean, I don't know what flavor of online prostitute this particular woman is, but I've always been under the impression that a major appeal of sites like OnlyFans was the parasocial aspect of interacting with the prestigious "content creators", not just the porn itself (even if said interaction is largely one-sided).

If anything, the threat of AI is a fantastic opportunity for all e-whores to do SUPPORT REAL VAGEEN campaigns and fleece their already emotionally attached simps.

I agree with you that “the girlfriend experience” is a big part of prostitution. That’s why simps will become fixated on one woman specifically. However, what I disagree with is the claim that real women provide a better “girlfriend experience” than AI. First, I should specify that “the girlfriend experience” is not the same as an actual girlfriend. It is a prostitute that you pay to be nice rather than cruel. An actual girlfriend can disagree with you, and that is what makes them capable of real (and not synthetic) kindness.

Anyway, AI is better at the girlfriend experience because no human will be as eternally present, willing, and helpful. ChatGPT never has a headache or has to take it’s mom to the oncologist, because it doesn’t have a mom. There’s even a whole South Park episode that plays with this idea - Stan surreptitiously uses a chatbot in his conversations with his girlfriend, Wendy. Because the bot is trained to be receptive, mirror the speaker, and speak delicately, Wendy falls more in love with Stan as a result.

You don’t need cartoons for this - actual people formed emotional attachments to AI like Tay, even though the developers never intended for such a thing to happen. And when the developers do intend to make people fall in love with AI, people will try and kill themselves when the program is deleted. So rather than making things easier for pornographers, it will outcompete them again.

There will be exceptions, sure. I think some of them will cope by saying that they’re not sexist weirdos because they “support sex workers”, just like how some people will pay more for coffee that’s “ethically sourced”.

 

[linchan]

I think hiring a prostitute, paying an online girlfriend, and having an AI girlfriend are all equally pathetic individually different ways. And arguing which is better is like choosing what method of injecting crack into your body is the most safe and ethical.

 

[gagabobo1997]

A minor update on copyright as it pertains to AI generated works. While this is an official statement from the Copyright Office, it doesn't make much of a dramatic change in either direction, as the copyright office determined for this time they do not think the new technology demands new legislation or policies. So no one gets full AI protection, no style protection for artist, but this isn't the Total AI Death people thought the copyright office would lay down on the industry.

I dont want to overhype this decision on either side because this merely expresses the most moderare compromise for both sides. Pure AI generated images do not qualify for copyright, but it can qualify if it was modified afterwards, even with AI tools. The article references the usage of de-ageing tools, or rotoscoping that is common place in the industry that benefits from development of AI.

While this clarifies the copyright protection of AI outputs, there is yet to be a statement on the infringement status of its inputs. So the fight hasn't been settled there, frankly not much was settled with this statement and we shouldn't expect it to be settled for the time being. This isn't a clear cut victory for either side.

https://variety.com/2025/biz/news/copyright-ai-tools-filmmaking-studios-office-1236288969/

View attachment 6920129

I have a feeling that most AI users are perfectly fine with this outcome. No one churning out AI porn is going to care about copyright and anyone using AI for anything serious will be making substantial contributions anyway so they can copyright it if they want. The only people I can see getting mad at this are anti-AI fiends who want it to be completely banned and stigmatized.

 

[Maurice Maine]

Here's my best shot at DignifAI-ing her. Unfortunately, there's only so much our machine overlords can do to a thot this undigified.

View attachment 6920965

Actual mugshot of a bitch arrested in 1967 for prostitution. When this specimen straight out of a 90s Born Bad rockabilly compilation with the waste of hairspray pictured here looks more dignified you know we went wrong somewhere.

 

[Runch]

I dont want to overhype this decision on either side because this merely expresses the most moderare compromise for both sides.

I don't know, it seems pretty in favor of AI to me. It fully legitimizes AI use as something anyone can do as part of a workflow. Allowing any of it is devastating to the people who have been whining about it for years now.

I know it would be fraud, but anyone who is passionate enough about something they made with AI to want to go after someone in court over copyright could simply lie and say they spent 1000 hours inpainting every detail of the image and sorry copyright office but my software doesn't save copies of that process every step of the way. Photographers aren't required to provide evidence that their photos weren't actually taken by a monkey (another situation which would deny copyright), so I don't know that you can require AI users to do the same.

 

[Colon capital V]

Total Copyright Death should be strived for still, but this is okay for what it is.

 

[linchan]

I don't know, it seems pretty in favor of AI to me. It fully legitimizes AI use as something anyone can do as part of a workflow.

It can always change if the technology develops, which it inevitably will, they just don't think they need new policies for the time being.

 

[linchan]

https://twitter.com/levelsio/status/1885460299748098429

 

[Kiwisee]

To my understanding, AI is being used by some studios to work as a visual tool for animators; to give them an idea of what aesthetic or mood to go for when it comes to specific scenes.

At the local college, according to my friend, AI animation is also being used to show students what not to do when it comes to mistakes. Its generally a happy medium because my friend’s professor says he doesn't have to tear down other artists anymore when he can just use AI to get his point across about why having attention to detail is important.

Since AI has been mainstream, a lot of the art students seem more motivated to improve their artworks than ever from what I've been hearing. This is only the case in my country, but it gives me hope that the threat of an AI takeover is what will push North American studios to start actually hiring talent instead of relying on the nepotism we've been seeing since the 2010s.

Forcing artists to work on their skills to look better than AI is a great thing, in my books. It'll increase the value of human made art overall, which is a win for society as a whole.

I don’t think it is a coincidence that people are tired of how generic a lot of 3D animation looks compared to traditional. The rise of AI could end up bringing back traditional art at this rate.

 

[BigGuyOS 6 : Jovial Janny]

To my understanding, AI is being used by some studios to work as a visual tool for animators; to give them an idea of what aesthetic or mood to go for when it comes to specific scenes.

At the local college, according to my friend, AI animation is also being used to show students what not to do when it comes to mistakes. Its generally a happy medium because my friend’s professor says he doesn't have to tear down other artists anymore when he can just use AI to get his point across about why having attention to detail is important.

Since AI has been mainstream, a lot of the art students seem more motivated to improve their artworks than ever from what I've been hearing. This is only the case in my country, but it gives me hope that the threat of an AI takeover is what will push North American studios to start actually hiring talent instead of relying on the nepotism we've been seeing since the 2010s.

Forcing artists to work on their skills to look better than AI is a great thing, in my books. It'll increase the value of human made art overall, which is a win for society as a whole.

I don’t think it is a coincidence that people are tired of how generic a lot of 3D animation looks compared to traditional. The rise of AI could end up bringing back traditional art at this rate.

It'll have the same effect on art that Stockfish did on chess. 20 years from now, we'll have millions of top tier traditional artists rather than the couple thousand we have now because they have stronger, more accessable teachers and opponents that they basically use to powerlevel their technical skills.
Also, I remember a lot of these Photoshop artists dancing on the grave of traditional painters. I have to say there's a lot of shadenfreude that the justifications they used to say "Drawing with layers and undo isn't a shortcut and is just as valid as traditional art, your just mad you don't know how to use Photoshop" is now being thrown back in their face. In order for them to denounce AI gens, they must now agree with the source argument against all digital art, which is "it's just using a computer to cheat."

 

[Kiwisee]

It'll have the same effect on art that Stockfish did on chess. 20 years from now, we'll have millions of top tier traditional artists rather than the couple thousand we have now because they have stronger, more accessable teachers and opponents that they basically use to powerlevel their technical skills.

This is exactly why I’ll never understand Redditors who say that redrawing AI generated images is a bad thing, or that it’s “art theft” even when you’re just redrawing from scratch. It’s a great exercise in not only showing that you can create better content than AI, it’s also great for teaching yourself to get better at fundamentals so that you can dodge most AI allegations.

Then again, every single video I’ve seen of artists getting falsely accused of using AI has always been via Twitter and Reddit. Neither of which are artist platforms in the first place.

They should probably stick to using actual art platforms instead of appeasing psychos on Twitter.