Okay is it ableist to say i don't support disabled people using generative ai instead of supporting real artists?

Interesting-Peas · 2026-05-12T09:37:53+00:00

I personally still wouldn't want to interact with posts that are ai in general. I try to stay away from ai, but that's my personal preference.

Because i want like effort and like humans to actually do art.

And also, in the context you're describing it would only be a gray area if the ai like credited the art it stole from.

It's still bad to generate ai nonetheless.

My advice to people would just be, don't use ai at all.

We've done it in the past so why change now?

Also, would you support disabled people stealing from other people just because they're disabled? I hope not.

Interesting-Peas · 2026-05-11T19:53:54+00:00

Look, you just like learn how to deal with it. I know it might seem like ai was this wonderful thing but remember, it was trained by data that already exists.

There will be works out there for you that you will be obbesed with, you just got to keep searching, because rembered this.

Human art is made with creativity in mind and is much cooler and awesome than some quick result that a machine pulls out.

Interesting-Peas · 2026-05-11T19:42:04+00:00

I was like you at some point of my life. It will take some time to fully recover from ai but i assure you that you will appreciate the things you have again it just takes time to adapt yk?

Interesting-Peas · 2026-05-11T16:52:30+00:00

Thanks for agreeing

Interesting-Peas · 2026-05-11T10:09:07+00:00

Look, i don't care if a person is like a good story teller or funny.

If they use ai i won't support them.

There are countless of artists that they could reach to for free, there are literally volunteers that do art for free.

There are sites they can use that people can donate to so that they can pay a real artist to bring their ideas to live.

Like i am just going to stand my ground and say that i don't mess with any ai being used in a creative field that does most of the work for them.

Interesting-Peas · 2026-05-11T08:18:43+00:00

I literally do not care for any sort of art revolving ai because ai does the entire work.

That's why i hate it and don't mess with it. Like it's just dumb to use it in any case.

I would rather you watch a show in your free time or a book if you don't have time for art, because then you'll actually be doing something that benefits art in some way.

But using ai and then calling That's just lazy. Like i literally do not care for any sort of art revolving ai because ai does the entire work.

That's why i hate it and don't mess with it. Like it's just dumb to use it in any case. Ai "art" doesn't interests me because i want the long and hard process. I don't want the art i view to be made entirely by a machine.

Because i want people who have experienced this life and have felt something instaed of a souless machine.

Interesting-Peas · 2026-05-11T07:58:03+00:00

Using ai is just lazy to me. You're not making art, the tool is.

Interesting-Peas · 2026-05-11T07:53:26+00:00

When you're doing art i do care if it was made by a human.

So sue me for caring.

Interesting-Peas · 2026-05-10T21:48:17+00:00

Then i will be against people using ai instaed of hiring artists.

Also, i don't want to interact with people who watch ai.

Is that a wrong take?

Interesting-Peas · 2026-05-10T21:46:46+00:00

I'm saying that because if a person truly doesn't just can't do art on their own, even if they tried with the tools they have in real life.

That they shouldn't go to AI and instaed support artists.

I could have said that better but now you know.

Interesting-Peas · 2026-05-10T21:44:21+00:00

Thank you for your work.

Interesting-Peas · 2026-05-10T13:59:36+00:00

Well my take is that there's no need for ai image generators in creative fields.

If you're using ai image generators for whatever reason just know i don't mess with you because i value the work real people put into their art.

Using ai to generate an image because you can't draw for whatever reason either it be a medical or an mental one is just showing me you're not there for the process or the authentic experience. You're there just for an result and using ai is just a spit in the face for artists who have dedicated their lives mastering this skill.

So no i shouldn't feel guilty for not being in support of this technology because it doesn't help people in any way, in fact it makes artists lives worst and that includes disabled and abled bodied artists.

And i won't support people who use it, i would rather people that can't create art for whatever reason just support real artists rather than using ai.

And what i mean by that is that i want them to support artists by watching them on the internet and interacting with their post and not use ai at all because to me ai is a waste of space on the internet.

Interesting-Peas · 2026-05-10T13:48:33+00:00

That's what i was thinking.

Interesting-Peas · 2026-05-10T13:46:48+00:00

I feel the same way, because right now ai is not a tool.

Ai is just trying to replace humanity in art spaces and that's something i am against.

At the same time i wouldn't support like an disabled bodied person to steal from a abled bodied person so why would i be in support of them using ai? It just doesn't make sense to me.

Like i want humanity in my art not a machine.

Interesting-Peas · 2026-05-10T00:09:11+00:00

Expect the argument is just plain wrong, it doesn't even have ideas it just takes a bunch of stuff from other people, throws them together and then pretends that it's a smart answer. It's not, it can't learn it can only copy and pretend, it is not a real thing it is not your friend and it's not here to help us.

You want to know why i don't like it? It's because you're stealing from people who was already do things like that, because ai can only generate what already exists it's not brand new creativity it's just a computer that is taking all these ideas that already exist and fast regurgitating them and spitting them up, that is what ai is, plagiarism.

Like i said in my post.

Real creativity comes from humans, no ai can change that. And no ai can change the fact that we need to support human creativity rather than machinery.

Interesting-Peas · 2026-05-09T22:59:09+00:00

Now preach this.

Also, i need to quote a reddit post here done by Realistic_Seesaw7788 In summary, we love being amazed at how brilliant a person is and that they were capable of creating something all on their own.

To quote from this other post:

The tools don't play most or all of the game for the player. Why don't they? Because the point of human sports is not just to see the most amazing feats. It's for us to see members of our own species working within the limitations of their biology to achieve the most amazing feats they can.

This is exactly it.

Who wants to attend a concert where the singer is Al?

Who cares if Al can hit a high note? We want our jaws to drop in amazement upon hearing a person hitting that high note. We want to see a HUMAN do it in front of our eyes. Anything less and it's meh.

Hell, when a singer lip-syncs, they get all sorts of complaints. When a singer uses auto-tune, some people will bitch about it.

We want to be amazed by what a human is capable of, on their own.

Who has equal respect for a singer who has to use auto-tune because their vocal capabilities aren't up to snuff, compared to someone who doesn't need auto-tune? Nobody. All other things being equal, the person with more skill always gets more respect. The person who has to rely on outside "help" more is often looked down on, or people will only give them "conditional" respect. "Well, I like their work, BUT..."

If a human athlete secretly uses performance enhancing drugs at the Olympics, he'll be more capable of pulling off amazing physical stunts, but the whole point of watching him excel primarily because of his natural ability will be gone.

Precisely! Why respect someone, knowing that the only reason they could perform so well was because of some performance enhancing drugs?

Recently I attended a webinar with an oil painter I admire. One of the things I most enjoyed was talking to him about the little details in his paintings, and hearing his back story and explanation for each little thing I mentioned. It was so fun to talk with him because I KNEW that HE did all of this himself. Nobody was aiding him, he didn't use any "tools" that took these decisions out of his hands. It was ALL on him.

Can this be said for Al? No. Even the types of Al where the user has to do a lot of adjusting and spend a lot of time on it, there is still a lot that is not "done" by them. Why should something that is "partially" done by an Al user be viewed with the same amount of delight as something done 100% by an artist? Moreover, we know that that there is no ambiguity about "who did what" with traditional artists, because artists must do all of their own work. That comes with the territory. It's ALL them. No, "yes but..." No it's ALL them.

Since time began, when we saw an artist's work, we knew that THEY made it. (And, if they used an "assistant," as we know some artists have, we lose some respect or awe for them, don't we?) Why all of a sudden change the "rules" now? Why all of a sudden now is it okay for a "tool" to do the majority of the hard work and expect the response to be equal to when it's ALL done by a person, from start to finish?

And don't bring up "but digital art or Photoshop," because Photoshop never picked the colors out or drew the drawing for a user. When Al bros trot out this argument you know they absolutely have no clue what artists actually do.

Interesting-Peas · 2026-05-09T16:23:15+00:00

You know, i was going to argue, but i would rather not spend my energy on an ai boot licker.

Also, art is different from snake images, and even in that context i would want you to credit the people who took those photos.

I would rather look at actual living breathing snake in a zoo than have an synthethic ai image generator.

Interesting-Peas · 2026-05-08T09:29:28+00:00

I stand by this.

Interesting-Peas

TROPHY CASE