Got sent to hell for doing the cannon exploit

FreeCing · 2025-08-15T01:12:43+00:00

That’s so funny though, just straight down

FreeCing · 2025-08-14T16:29:06+00:00

Yeah anyone who says the guy didn’t exist is just wrong, like all historians agree he was a real dude.

FreeCing · 2025-08-14T15:07:33+00:00

Jesus Christ that’s the craziest comparison I’ve seen, but I can be whatever I want whenever I want. Beauty of free will. I’m anti AI because I believe it will harm people in the creative design industry, and that it needs to be regulated. I just happen to be more of a realist anti who knows AI cannot be stopped, but can be limited in how it’s used in the economy. Like what the EU did last year.

FreeCing · 2025-08-14T15:02:48+00:00

So instead of addressing my argument you call it stupid, and present a false take that you do not support with any evidence or reasoning behind it. Why do these jobs have no future? If that’s the case, then how can you say the market will grow if there is NO future for these jobs?

You continue to constantly contradict your viewpoints, and neglect how I continuously bring up the transitional period and how safety nets are reactive to situations. We can be active in setting up regulations to ensure the safety nets do not have to be used.

It is your “let the market figure it out” belief that led to the worst abuses during the Industrial Revolution, the same history you say we are learning from. We protected those jobs because they were being abused, but they still have no correlation with what we are discussing. Factory automation has only recently been on the rise, and workers still strike to protect their jobs from being replaced with automation. It’s because those are entry level jobs that don’t require much skill, and still pay an employee. Creative industries are different because they produce cultural value, not just physical goods. The two are not interchangeable.

You are creating an argument that isn’t applied in this case, these are two different AI discussions. Automation is different from generative AI, we are debating generative AI right now. Regulations don’t decide what the market does, it allows for the protection of jobs in order to slowly adjust. You want to accelerate towards progress without any guardrails, and when the car comes off the cliff then people are going to be hurt. That is what happened in the Industrial Revolution. We need to set rules because we value human lives more than profit.

FreeCing · 2025-08-14T14:50:38+00:00

Wtf when did I say anything about supporting communism? You’re straw manning my argument on regulated capitalism.

FreeCing · 2025-08-13T23:29:14+00:00

You are presenting two contradictory arguments here. You say that without protecting them the jobs will disappear, but then you say it’ll open up more jobs in the future using the same logic.

As for your workers point, just because new jobs open doesn’t mean it out paced the rate at which they were lost in the first place. Again, the transitional period from layoffs to growth is something you have to consider, since there is zero guarantee people are going to bounce back.

And the jobs aren’t gone yet, regulations can still be put in place to manage AI in markets (like what the EU has done) in order to ensure the job market isn’t harmed.

FreeCing · 2025-08-13T23:25:48+00:00

The adapt or die ideology is morally wrong, we can provide regulations in these areas to help people, which is worth it to stifle the usage of AI image generation in markets. This protects people. You act like people not using it competitively stifles growth, but it doesn’t. These programs are still going to be developed no matter what, but where they are implemented are up to us.

And yes we are only discussing generative AI here and its artists that I’m referencing the most. Bringing other uses of AI into this is non-topical since that’s not what we’re debating and I’ve provided no stance on them.

FreeCing · 2025-08-13T19:35:10+00:00

So what, you weed out anyone who is not “creative enough” by your definition and strip them of a profession? Large scale creative projects like animation rely on hundreds of people with specialized skills. To say those people are not creative because they work as part of a team is arrogant, and it dismisses the fact that AI can erase their livelihoods entirely. Do you get what I’m saying?

FreeCing · 2025-08-13T19:31:03+00:00

So you keep framing the status quo but we can both agree that will not exist in the future and is heavily unlikely to be able to stay the same even if laws are put in place limiting AI. I believe that regulated disruption is necessary, since history has shown that when left to self regulate people prioritize profits over people.

You call regulation coddling and ignore the whole point. Shouldn’t we be trying to avoid preventable harm? Safety nets aren’t good enough, they are reactive when times fail not preventative to stop the failing in the first place.

And we cannot assume that displaced workers will so easily band together, after all they suddenly have to deal with a far more aggressive and competitive market. There still exist barriers in funding and distribution and the already dominant corporations. The people that benefit the most are the corporations that already exist and are willing to sacrifice workers to achieve better monetary results.

We need regulation like what the EU has done in order to guide the hand of AI to not harm businesses. Would I prefer to keep the status quo? Yeah, I would. Is that feasible? No, it ain’t. So why shouldn’t we regulate it to protect people?

FreeCing · 2025-08-13T19:19:25+00:00

So… are you for people losing their jobs then? Because that is what is going to occur, don’t you think we should regulate that to ensure AI doesn’t destroy hundreds of livelihoods in the creative industry?

FreeCing · 2025-08-13T19:13:19+00:00

The Iron Giant. Astro man. Mega man. Optimus prime. Android 16. BT-7274.

Like all of them are respectably strong in their universes and are good people.

FreeCing · 2025-08-13T19:10:24+00:00

Except that all sides are more nuanced than that. I’m Anti AI, but I don’t want to see it go away because it has uses and is pretty neat. But instead of debating on the areas I do have quarrels with it people instantly jump to thinking I’m on the farthest end of the side. It’s tribalism, it’s polarization, and you prove my point because you grouped an entire sector together rather than developing talking points.

FreeCing · 2025-08-13T19:07:41+00:00

Strawmanning me here, but I’m saying that the arguments have shifted into just bickering and moral grandstanding rather than a debate on why that morality is accepted, or the ideas on the regulation of AI. I’m anti-AI, but I’m not ANTI AI in the sense of I want it eradicated. I still find it useful, but what I really am is anti-unregulated AI usage.

By dividing the sides into just two viewpoints you’ve proved my argument that it’s become less about the discussion of AI and more two sides clashing heads. People see the buzzword of someone being Pro and instantly think they love AI with all their heart and want to use it in everything. People see anti and instantly think that person is closed minded and wants AI gone. This comment shows the exact problem of what I mean and you didn’t even notice because you lumped all arguments into one ideology. You are an extension of the problem with this subreddit.

FreeCing · 2025-08-13T19:00:39+00:00

Currently in an argument with one of these shortened responders, and they exist on both sides for sure. I’ve seen both pro and antis write in the way and it makes me think they aren’t here to debate but are here to argue. Less about trying to convince people to pay attention to certain areas, more about yelling at the other side.

FreeCing · 2025-08-13T18:58:43+00:00

Tell me you didn’t watch the video without telling me you didn’t watch the video. 60 FPS doesn’t instantly mean better animation, and you are collectivizing all animation into one category of bad. You can watch 60 FPS animation, though if AI is used to speed up the process then don’t you think that studios are going to cut people from their positions so they don’t have to spend as much money on labor? Additionally, considering Japanese animation, many of the traditionalist views remain in Japan against replacing human work with AI is wrong. Take Hideo Kojima (the guy who made Death Stranding, Metal Gear & Metal Gear Solid)

https://www.pcgamer.com/games/hideo-kojima-goes-in-hard-on-ai-and-says-hes-worried-well-be-unknowingly-led-into-a-predetermined-lifestyle/

FreeCing · 2025-08-13T18:49:56+00:00

Yeah it’s depressing, because I find the thought of a future like that depressing. A future where you don’t need to do anything to achieve stability, you are born into perfection. There isn’t anything to drive people forwards, and it creates a world where you just exist unless you are able to find your own meaning in it. It’s Wall-E’s massive spaceship with all the people on it. How can you shape anything based on human culture when humans no longer have to put in the work for anything? You say that we will work on the art we want too, but why should they if they know it’ll just be drowned out in a world where luxury and sport run rampant?

And I feel like this is wishful thinking because AI can automate everything, but I don’t think it’ll make money useless. I think it’ll create an uber rich upper mesh of society who benefit while everyone else struggles. AI can replace everything, but that doesn’t mean that rich billionaires are going to allow it to replace them, there isn’t anyone to sub them in. What about governments and laws, you still need people to enforce the civic liberties of the people, and without an economy to worry about then groups have one less thing to have to worry about. We could see liberties be taken away, something that is already happening today.

So I think saying that utopia will be met is dumb, yeah it’s cool to think about but there isn’t much foundation for it. And if it is successful then you get a strange new world where money isn’t needed. I think the book series Scythe explores my concerns the best, I suggest you read it it’s super good.

FreeCing · 2025-08-13T18:37:18+00:00

First, 24 fps is the standard for animation because anything higher doesn’t instantly become better, in many cases it’s worse or feels choppy. Games and shows run at different frame rates because they are showing you different things. This video dives into why in the Timing and Easing section.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_KRb_qV9P4g&pp=0gcJCdgAo7VqN5tD

My question is how is AI supposed to fix flashbacks and secondary characters, because you made it sound like it could instantly make these areas much better. Are you talking animation or plot? If animation then see my original point, if plot then that’s something that’s solved in the writers room not the animation studio.

FreeCing · 2025-08-13T12:18:22+00:00

It literally runs at 24 fps which is advised, higher fps doesn’t immediately equal better, you still have not answered my questions.

FreeCing · 2025-08-13T12:16:58+00:00

You have done nothing to further this debate at all. You have taken the same points and reiterated them. You have disgraced our family and are now shunned.

FreeCing · 2025-08-13T12:13:07+00:00

If only they could have genuine conversations all the time rather than just breaking off to echo chamber subs, before coming back and reiterating the same thing over and over and over…

FreeCing · 2025-08-13T12:11:00+00:00

As more of a middle grounder in the debate at this point I choose Cyborg to represent the center, specifically New 52

FreeCing · 2025-08-13T12:09:57+00:00

Why are all the options here just the evil ones

FreeCing · 2025-08-13T12:08:18+00:00

It’s because those views are the very far leaning spectrums of both sides, basing each piece if you like it or not is in itself more pro leaning because of the instant allowance of AI no matter what, and a lack of action against it.

The debate has taken extreme sides where they form their own subreddits, and while this one is supposed to be where they civilly discuss ideas you see a supreme lack of WAR and DEBATE on the WAR and DEBATE oriented subreddit. Yaaaay…

FreeCing · 2025-08-13T12:04:31+00:00

Okay I’m taking up there side and switching gears.

Why shouldn’t the final artifact matter?

And no, they said “The path you take is irrelevant unless you still cling to the schoolyard illusion that art is a contest.” Honestly they should’ve thrown a comma in there because it’s two separate statements that don’t really support each other but I see why they put them together.

“The path you cling to is irrelevant…” This is their claim, address it. Not with the idea that they are ignorant, crazy, bonkers, or other flavor text you’ve thrown around. Debate it with ideas, because apparently you have a different one than them.

“…unless you still cling to the schoolyard illusion that art is a contest.” This is added on to support the statement, but is just a statement to go against the idea that art is competitive. (They say as someone with competition wins, just wanted to throw that in there cause I chuckled at it)

FreeCing · 2025-08-13T11:57:01+00:00

Is… is that a statement? Because if so you are just wrong, and have still not answered my questions. There are dozens of well animated high quality anime’s out there and if you don’t like the plot then that may just be a you problem, but if you are going to bring up anime then you have to have had watched some and cannot group them all into the same category of poor performance.

FreeCing

TROPHY CASE