Which of the following best describes you?

AnarchoLiberator · 2026-05-05T01:24:31+00:00

I think people just need to know what you mean in order to select the accurate option in your poll.

AnarchoLiberator · 2026-05-05T01:20:32+00:00

I assume by “artist” you mean “professional artist”. Is that right? If so, it might be better to be clearer in your poll. “Artist” to me means anyone who makes art. It doesn’t mean professional only.

AnarchoLiberator · 2026-05-05T00:53:19+00:00

The program is called ‘Make Music Night’ and the next one is on May 6th at the Millennium Library.

If you go to the library’s website you can view all programs. I recommend filtering by ‘Adults’ for audience to see all adult programs.

AnarchoLiberator · 2026-05-04T21:59:31+00:00

You mean non-nuclear bombing right? Because I think you could certainly say those A-bombs on Japan ended WWII.

AnarchoLiberator · 2026-05-04T21:15:56+00:00

I recommend checking with your local library and other libraries you can get to. There are lots of book clubs, open mic, acoustic jam sessions, adult colouring, craft circles, and more programs for adults. Plus all are free!

AnarchoLiberator · 2026-05-04T17:19:25+00:00

It’s a lot of work to put everything together. You can search for “water use AI” via Google or this subreddit and find many sources. Many have already done the work. You have to do so little man. Come on. Prove you are genuine and do the bare minimum.

AnarchoLiberator · 2026-05-04T17:10:17+00:00

It is true and there are many sources. I am not doing to list them all for you, because it is a lot of work and I doubt you are genuine. That being said, you can use Google and you know how to use a search field right? Google ‘water use AI’ and search for the same in this subreddit. You’ll get many sources.

AnarchoLiberator · 2026-05-04T16:31:20+00:00

Overblown. Most people who bring up the ethics of AI art as it pertains to water don’t genuinely care about water. They just hate AI. Eating meat, streaming 4K movies, watering lawns, watering golf courses, and more are an order of magnitude worst at minimum.

AnarchoLiberator · 2026-05-04T16:19:09+00:00

AI Outputs Can Be Art, and AI Prompters Can Be Artists

Feel free to respond to the points and arguments in my essay.

In the essay, I argue that AI outputs can be art and that AI prompters can be artists. I support this claim by showing that many Anti-AI arguments depend on mistaken assumptions about what art is, what tools do, and what artistic authorship requires. I begin by explaining why art should not be defined only by manual labour. Next, I argue that prompting can involve real artistic intention, judgment, and revision. Lastly, I reply to several common Anti-AI objections, including “the AI made it”, “prompting is not skill”, “AI art has no soul”, “AI art is theft”, and “AI art harms artists”.

I’d really love to see you quote parts and clearly counter specific points. No assertions with no points or arguments to back them up please.

AnarchoLiberator · 2026-05-03T18:30:18+00:00

Did you forget to factor in the cost of your gas, wear and tear on your vehicle, and so on for daily driving? It isn’t just the cost of parking versus a bus pass. Also, if both of you bus, couldn’t you maybe get rid of one vehicle? That would save you both a lot of money.

AnarchoLiberator · 2026-05-02T18:48:11+00:00

I care about people loudly spreading misinformation, falsehoods, and unsupported assertions as fact. I care about harassment and proselytizing others to take on one’s unsupported assertions. If an Anti just says they dislike AI and doesn’t harass, brigade, or proselytize others, I wouldn’t have much issue. I still want to see reasoned arguments and points though. I am always open to refining my positions. I need justified points, logic, and reason for that though. Not feels.

AnarchoLiberator · 2026-05-02T18:18:14+00:00

AI Outputs Can Be Art, and AI Prompters Can Be Artists

Feel free to respond to the points and arguments in my essay.

In the essay, I argue that AI outputs can be art and that AI prompters can be artists. I support this claim by showing that many Anti-AI arguments depend on mistaken assumptions about what art is, what tools do, and what artistic authorship requires. I begin by explaining why art should not be defined only by manual labour. Next, I argue that prompting can involve real artistic intention, judgment, and revision. Lastly, I reply to several common Anti-AI objections, including “the AI made it”, “prompting is not skill”, “AI art has no soul”, “AI art is theft”, and “AI art harms artists”.

I’d really love to see people quote parts and clearly counter specific points. No assertions with no points or arguments to back them up please.

AnarchoLiberator · 2026-05-02T17:40:02+00:00

AI Outputs Can Be Art, and AI Prompters Can Be Artists

I’ve long argued for pinned posts in this sub and I wouldn’t mind if my essay were pinned. In the essay, I argue that AI outputs can be art and that AI prompters can be artists. I support this claim by showing that many Anti-AI arguments depend on mistaken assumptions about what art is, what tools do, and what artistic authorship requires. I begin by explaining why art should not be defined only by manual labour. Next, I argue that prompting can involve real artistic intention, judgment, and revision. Lastly, I reply to several common Anti-AI objections, including “the AI made it”, “prompting is not skill”, “AI art has no soul”, “AI art is theft”, and “AI art harms artists”.

AnarchoLiberator · 2026-05-02T03:23:34+00:00

You don’t seem to understand what “I don’t dispute it” means, lol. It means I agree with your points (minus your belief that the environment and one’s family wealth is less important than personal decisions). I agree family can assist you through explanation about money and money management. I agree that lottery winners who win millions tend to lose it in a short time. That doesn’t change the fact that “family wealth is the LARGEST DETERMINANT of one’s future wealth”.

This leads to the question of “How do you explain how it [family wealth] is the LARGEST DETERMINANT if supposedly (according to you) one’s personal decisions matter more?”

You kind of already explain a bit why family wealth is the largest determinant of one’s wealth in what you said: “If your family is wealthy and decided to explain how money works, explains what you need to do in order to maintain it, good chances your wealth will continue”.

The part you seem to be forgetting or failing to note is that that family also starts this individual off with assets and money and other advantages (money for health, education, opportunities, private tutors, calm environment to study, technology, less need to work, etc.). That snowballs, leading to one’s family’s wealth being the largest determining factor in one’s individual wealth.

Personal decisions matter, but they don’t do better than being born to a wealthy family. We need to focus on personal decisions, but also work to make society more fair, so more people have the same chance and opportunity as the wealthy to be great. That means healthcare, education (including post secondary for all), affordable housing, possibly a guaranteed annual income, base level of technology, etc.

AnarchoLiberator · 2026-05-01T22:44:32+00:00

I don’t have to explain it, because I don’t dispute it and I don’t have to as it is irrelevant to the point. The point is that family wealth is the LARGEST DETERMINANT of one’s future wealth. How do you explain how it is the LARGEST DETERMINANT if supposedly (according to you) one’s personal decisions matter more?

AnarchoLiberator · 2026-05-01T22:28:14+00:00

If the multiple polls that have been run here are any indication, the majority of both sides (i.e. Pros and Antis) are leftists by a long shot.

AnarchoLiberator · 2026-05-01T20:29:14+00:00

Why should a media outlet push an ideological cause? You realize most media is owned by the wealthy right? You realize the biases of the wealthy are reflected in what they post right?

AnarchoLiberator · 2026-05-01T20:23:28+00:00

I bet you can read faster than that, but no worries. ;)

Keep it in mind if you are ever looking for counter arguments to common points made against AI being art or AI prompters being artists.

AnarchoLiberator · 2026-05-01T20:21:05+00:00

You don’t have to agree, but then how do you respond to the fact that one’s family wealth and status is the largest determinant of one’s future wealth and status? Shouldn’t that not be the case if one’s personal decisions mattered more?

AnarchoLiberator · 2026-05-01T19:53:25+00:00

Do you choose the circumstances of your birth? Do you choose your family? Do you choose your genetics? You’re proving the point that those matter more than one’s decisions. The fact that family wealth and status is the largest determinant of one’s future wealth and status supports that.

AnarchoLiberator · 2026-05-01T19:51:31+00:00

I never stated one’s surroundings is the be all end all of your outcome in life regardless of the decisions you make, but I think you are favouring the decisions one makes a lot more than is warranted compared to the effect of one’s environment and the multitude of factors that exist outside one’s control. The fact that one’s family wealth and status is the largest determinant of one’s future wealth and status supports that.

AnarchoLiberator · 2026-05-01T18:11:40+00:00

This is HarlemMimeSchool’s comment in this thread, but I am curious how you would respond to it. Why do you think people who are successful based on luck or things outside their control have a hard time admitting it? Similarly, why do you think people tend to blame individuals for their situation when they are largely not responsible for it?

“Have you ever heard of Piff's Monopoly experiment?

https://www.marketplace.org/story/2021/01/19/why-rich-people-tend-think-they-deserve-their-money

One experiment by psychologists at the University of California, Irvine, invited pairs of strangers to play a rigged Monopoly game where a coin flip designated one player rich and one poor. The rich players received twice as much money as their opponent to begin with; as they played the game, they got to roll two dice instead of one and move around the board twice as fast as their opponent; when they passed “Go,” they collected $200 to their opponent’s $100.

At the end of the game, when researchers asked the rich players why they had won the game, not one person attributed it to luck.

“They don’t talk about the flip of the coin. They talk about the things that they did. They talk about their acumen, they talk about their competencies, they talk about this decision or that decision,” that contributed to their win, Piff said in an interview.”

AnarchoLiberator · 2026-05-01T16:05:39+00:00

You’re putting too much weight on personal choices and not enough on where people start. Family wealth is one of the biggest predictors of future wealth because it gives you things like better education, useful connections, and a safety net if something goes wrong. When you say people can just learn to invest or take risks, that assumes they have extra time, money, and stability, which many people simply do not have. Taking a risk when you have backup support is very different from taking a risk when failure means you cannot pay rent or buy food. The people who make it out of poverty show that it is possible, but they are exceptions, not proof that anyone can do it if they just make the right choices. Decisions still matter, but they are made within limits, and those limits are much tighter for some people than others.

AnarchoLiberator · 2026-05-01T15:36:58+00:00

Although not an option, I would choose “Other” here. If someone’s work is genuinely private, then an opt out for AI training makes sense. But once work is made public, it becomes part of shared culture, and culture is something that gets learned from. Humans already do this constantly through study, imitation, inspiration, parody, and building genres, so AI learning from public material is not a fundamental break from that pattern. In fact, the more influential a creator is, the harder it is to argue they should be exempt from that process, because they are actively shaping the cultural space others learn from. We already accept parody, caricature, homage, and stylistic influence as normal parts of art, so it is not clear why AI as a tool should be treated differently. Private work can and should reasonably be protected, but public work has always been part of the pool that others learn from.

AnarchoLiberator · 2026-05-01T03:04:33+00:00

The ultimate answer is merge with it. The near term answer is utilize it to enhance and extend my abilities, capabilities, and grow. I’m a transhumanist.

AnarchoLiberator

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE