They claim to be pro-human but their argument of environmentalism is incredibly anti-human.
AI Derangement Syndrome / Anti-AI artists / Pro-AI technocultists / AI "debate" communities - The Natural Retardation in the Artificial Intelligence communities
- Thread starter gagabobo1997
- Start date
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2024
And it's also why I always call adoptables "politically-correct NFTs". It's okay for an artist to ask $100 so you could own their rinky dinky basic wolfsona. It's okay for an artist to ask $450 because they got like, five arts of their sona. It's okay to mooch off hundreds from people because you're a starving artist and people are willing to give you an easy half-grand because support your local artists or whatever.
Equally stupid as NFTs but NFTs arguably did it worse with the pricing so people had further reasonings to hate it beyond "People are paying [X] amount of money to own something someone can just save as and own instead? Wow, it's not like adoptables are the exact same thing but I'll just ignore it."
And let's not forget the whole omnichange(? forgot how it's called) thing where they correlate one big leftist issue with another. Crypto? Bad. Environment? Good. Crypto and environment? Bad. Right wingers? Bad. Crypto and Right wingers? Bad. Bad, bad bad.
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2014
I prefer the ones who are openly anti-human like Petti Linkola.
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2019
I hate these people suffering from AI derangement syndrome because as soon as its made public that some part of something is ai or even touched ai, they piss themselves and cry that the post is the new Hitler. For example, a silly meme about some banjo metal on Instagram
Link
Looking at the comments, its all about how its AI slop and how their days are ruined for learning that. However, its not (from my own research. Feel free to check me on that). On youtube, he does use ai images to generate the thumbnails or parts of the music video, but not the song itself. On top of that, its all royalty free.
These people are so far gone that they literally get pissy when someone who does something for free uses free programs to use free custom art. On top of that, they hear AI and think the entire thing is AI. Some prime examples of AI schizos
Edit: Somehow my link went to a study about autists? Idk but I fixed it
Link
Looking at the comments, its all about how its AI slop and how their days are ruined for learning that. However, its not (from my own research. Feel free to check me on that). On youtube, he does use ai images to generate the thumbnails or parts of the music video, but not the song itself. On top of that, its all royalty free.
These people are so far gone that they literally get pissy when someone who does something for free uses free programs to use free custom art. On top of that, they hear AI and think the entire thing is AI. Some prime examples of AI schizos
Edit: Somehow my link went to a study about autists? Idk but I fixed it
Last edited:
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2019
I don't know. I pasted in an instagram link and now I'm apparently educating people on autism? I fixed it now or at least I think I did.
- Joined
- May 30, 2024
At least with the adoptables you actually HAVE something, NFTs were just an utterly retarded idea that only utter retards bought into and all of the B/C list celebrities that pushed that retarded shit should be punched in the throat for their shameless whoring.
What exactly did they have?
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2018
Not too sure. NFT, you at least you definitively own the NFT. With Adaptables you are beholden to the artist's whims legally. NFTs had good intentions until folks got greedy and things got gayer.
- Joined
- May 30, 2024
NFTs were never anything but a complete and total scam that's why they used such overly complicated jargon to describe what the fuck they were supposed to actually be and why you should waste your time and money on them rather than just being straightforward, make yourself sound like you know what you're talking about and suckers will feel comfortable giving you money.
In the end the whole concept was you buy an ugly cheap copy pasted slightly edited shitty digital doodle and you own it and can sell it like a crypto currency. "AND??? What kind of moron would even waste their time with this stupid shit?" was pretty much the entire planet's response to this retarded idea and that's why it failed miserably lol.
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2018
They were a way of verification of digital ownership like metadata but backed with blockchain. An NFT is not visually represented, it is a token on the blockchain that contains metadata like pointing to the original artist, etc. In addition it would have allowed artists to give terms of use, etc. I feel this started coming out around the time artists and photographers were making a stink about news outlets not crediting or paying people to use their content. Would've been nice until people realized they could make money from it and here we are.
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2018
Adding my two cents as an artist as i've seen this trend the last couple of decades. The self worth of most artists diminishes quickly especially on the internet when it has devolved into hashtags, clicks, likes and reposts. If art is so free and open for interpretation according to these types and it is dependent on what the individual can get entertainment value from then A.I isn't a big deal. All these arguments i've seen against it doesn't stop the physical person from making art and it's corny when i see people have to refer themselves as a "human artist" like they somehow got replaced with an autonomous robot that can draw or something lol.
- Joined
- May 21, 2019
A lot of people consider being told to kill themselves a death threat these days, I’m not sure when this categorization was made but 99% chance that’s what it is lol
Slurred
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2022
Not really. Buying an adoptable just puts your username on the work's page. You don't get copyright or anything, and other people can still download the image, just like with NFTs. Per the FAQ (archive):
With an NFT, your claim to the piece is recorded on the blockchain and not tied to the fate of your DeviantArt account. So you're actually getting less with an adoptable. I guess the management at DeviantArt figured that they could get away with doing NFTs without blockchain because most people don't understand any of that stuff anyway.
I don't want to defend the NFT hype period in 2021/2022 too much, it was pretty stupid for the most part. The vast majority of people do not collect original artworks and the appeal of doing so is a lot less obvious when the artwork itself is entirely digital. It was always going to be a highly niche market and/or front for money laundering/tax write-offs. People are still actively trading CryptoPunks for prices around $100k. And the existence of adoptables shows that there is at least a small market segment hungry for this kind of thing, silly as it looks to most.
But to get back on topic:
From /r/aiwars (archive):
I don't understand this line of thinking, but I suppose it comes naturally to the kinds of people who had their Harry Potter tattoos blacked out after JK Rowling fell from grace with the left and retroactively decided that they had always preferred Animorphs. What a sad way to live, having your aesthetic sensibilities be entirely contingent on political loyalty.
Ok imagine seeing an image of a smoking hot woman, and then later discovering that its a photoshop of a tranny. Thats how it feels to them.
regalterry
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2024
So, they're basically getting offended on behalf of "genuine" women, that make substantial use of plastic surgery and photoshopping for their looks, that don't know they exist and wouldn't fuck them even if they did?
They're also the kind of people that will say troons "pass."
Never understood the hysterics over AI.
The genie is already out of the bottle and there's no putting it back in again. Reminds of what I read was happening when photography, and radio, and cinema, and TV were eventually introduced, and you always had a retarded contingent of hipsters foaming at the mouth about the precious artistic integrity being tarnished by filthy technology.
The simple truth is that AI won't threaten people with actual talent, the real artists with that special spark, but will absolutely obliterate every mid faggot churning out slop for social media clout and internet gibs, and I'm supposed to give a shit?
Anti pedo
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2018
[Warning Power Level]
i'm gonna steal a joke from my bro, that is appropriate for this thread.
"these anti-ai artist probably failed biology at school so bad, that they never consider mutual symbiosis with ai"
and here is obligatory "AI victim" comic.
i'm gonna steal a joke from my bro, that is appropriate for this thread.
"these anti-ai artist probably failed biology at school so bad, that they never consider mutual symbiosis with ai"
and here is obligatory "AI victim" comic.
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2024
Remember, these are the same faggots that told laid off coal miners to "learn to code" and repeat the Reddit mantra of "if an illegal immigrant took your job you should be embarrassed". I have no sympathy for any overly socialized theater kid who gets laid off by AI. I support going full accelerationist on automation until it's painfully apparent that shitskins serve no purpose.
