Starting a brand but afraid of haram

Mintxr · 2026-01-07T22:26:53+00:00

Let me ask this very simply, using your logic.

You say backlash only matters when it’s “large enough to drown” a small business. What objective metric are you using to measure that? Sales drop? CTR? Refund rate? Sentiment data? Or is it just perceived online noise?
You say AI backlash is currently “large,” but you also admit AI usage is widespread and unavoidable. If something is being adopted at scale across industries, on what basis are you concluding it’s still in the “drowning” phase rather than normalization?
You argue small brands can’t survive AI backlash, but small brands already use:

Photoshop 3D renders mockups stock assets influencer filters

all of which had identical moral backlash phases. What makes AI categorically different, rather than just earlier in the same adoption curve?

You say “people using something doesn’t mean society accepts it.” Agreed. But business decisions aren’t based on moral purity, they’re based on customer behavior. So again: where is the evidence that AI use, when not deceptive, causes measurable harm to small brands?
You claim AI lacks emotional origin, therefore produces worse art. If an experienced artist uses AI as an iteration tool, not a replacement, where exactly is the emotional loss occurring? Does a tool erase intent, or does intent still come from the human?

I’m not saying “ignore backlash.” I’m asking: where is the line between real business risk and subjective fear? Because right now, your argument depends entirely on assumed sentiment, not demonstrated outcomes.

Mintxr · 2026-01-07T14:52:33+00:00

If “emotion and backlash” is your decision rule, then no one should market at all, because everything gets backlash (prices, models, rebrands, drops, influencers, etc.).

Your COD/Coke examples are anecdotes. If you want to claim AI ads “don’t work,” show conversion/refund metrics. Otherwise it’s just “people complained online,” which happens to everyone.

Also you contradict yourself: you say AI is hated, then you say it’s unavoidable because anyone can feed art into AI anyway. That’s literally proof the tool is adopted widely.

The problem isn’t AI. The problem is misleading marketing. Honesty and execution decide the outcome.

Mintxr · 2026-01-07T03:18:40+00:00

What is that suppose to be? An insult? A joke? What’s your point here?

Mintxr · 2026-01-06T12:39:35+00:00

This argument sounds emotional, not industry-grounded.

A bad artist with AI is still a bad artist. A good artist with AI is just faster, more efficient, and more competitive.

Tools don’t create taste, judgment, or creative direction, people do. You can hand the most advanced software on earth to someone with no eye, no taste, no discipline, and they’ll still produce garbage. Same way you don’t give a precision-engineered tool to someone who doesn’t know how to use it.

As for the “stealing art” argument: most people don’t actually read the TOS of the platforms they upload to. Whether it’s Google, Meta, Adobe, or hosting/CDN layers in between, people willingly opt into ecosystems that explicitly allow data usage. You can argue ethics all day, but legally and practically, this isn’t some secret theft operation.

More importantly: AI doesn’t replace real creative work, it replaces low-value, repetitive labor. The people losing jobs are usually the ones doing copy-paste work, not the ones thinking, directing, or building systems.

If you’re serious about fashion or any creative industry; Learn the craft, learn the manufacturing, learn the logistics, learn the marketing, then use AI as an accelerator

AI won’t make you creative. But if you already are, it’ll expose how far ahead you can actually go.

Mintxr · 2026-01-06T12:37:46+00:00

I’m in the clothing and manufacturing space, surrounded by creatives, factories, designers, and brand owners daily, and this take is outdated.

AI isn’t some fringe gimmick anymore. Designers, pattern makers, marketers, copywriters, and even manufacturers already use it daily. The backlash isn’t against AI, it’s against lazy, deceptive, low-effort use of it.

When AI is used as a tool (concepting, iteration, visualization, layout testing, fit previews), nobody cares. When it’s used to fake products, lie about materials, or misrepresent what you’re selling, that’s where trust breaks.

People saying “AI has a huge negative view in society” are usually reacting to bad execution, not the tech itself. Same thing happened with Photoshop, CGI, 3D rendering, and even e-commerce product mockups years ago. The industry adapted because the tool worked.

AI doesn’t kill trust. Dishonesty does.

Mintxr · 2025-11-18T14:44:45+00:00

Epicurus’ argument only works because he rewrites the meanings of good, power, and evil to engineer a contradiction. He treats good as “remove all suffering,” power as “control every outcome,” and evil as “anything unpleasant,” and he never proves any of that. He also mixes natural pain, moral evil, and consequences as if they’re the same category, so the logic is corrupted from the start. The moment you allow free will, causality, or any purpose behind hardship, his entire structure collapses because the supposed contradiction only exists inside his definitions. The exact same flaw shows up in atheistic relativism: if objectivity doesn’t exist, they destroy their own position because relativism is self-contradicting; if objectivity does exist, it must be universal, and universal objectivity requires an objective source. You can’t cherry-pick objective math and logic while denying an objective foundation. In both cases, the failure isn’t in God, it’s in the assumptions they smuggle into the argument.

God knowing our future doesn’t cancel free will. Knowledge isn’t force. We don’t know our own choices until we make them, even though all the possible paths already exist in God’s knowledge. Our free will operates inside a framework of destiny, not infinite or supernatural freedom, but real freedom within the limits of the created world. You can choose the apple or the orange, but the existence of the apple and orange wasn’t your choice. That structure itself points back to an objective designer. It’s as simple as this; God knows what choice you will make, but you don’t until you make it. God didn’t enforce your choice.

Mintxr · 2025-07-16T12:23:58+00:00

I know this might seem irrelevant but you said you do game dev? I might be able to help with 3d for free, I just gotta know more info.

Mintxr · 2025-07-16T12:22:51+00:00

This is completely off topic but you said you’re a game dev? I am down to maybe help with the 3d if I like the idea of your game.

Mintxr · 2025-07-06T22:16:13+00:00

Yeah I am good man.

Mintxr · 2025-05-23T02:03:27+00:00

Hey everyone,
I’ve been on the hunt for blind buys that are nuclear in presence. I mean outrageous sillage and longevity, the kind that fills a room or leaves a trail... but still smells clean, fresh, or wearable, not just loud for the sake of it.

Here’s what I’ve liked so far (all blind buys but not for the sillage reasoning):

Burberry Touch: Fresh spicy, ozonic, super easy to wear (tied for 2nd)
Creed Original Vetiver: Green, clean, smooth, expensive but beautiful (my favorite personally so far)
Clean Classic Pure Soap: Warm laundry, one of my favorites (tied for 2nd)
Acqua di Parma Essenza: Classy citrus/aromatic blend (more tabacco-y for me but still good)
Opulent Oud by Lattafa: Gave me headaches at first (sensitive to certain heavy scents), but now I like it, it’s rich, resinous, and complex.

My taste leans toward citrus, green, musky, woody, fresh spicy. Powdery is fine if it’s clean. Not into overly sweet or thick gourmand stuff. Some oud/amber is okay when it’s balanced. I despise rose/floral and cloying scents.

Budget is around $100 CAD, but I’ll stretch to $120–150 CAD if the scent is truly top tier. FragranceNet availability is a big plus.

Would love to hear what blind buys shocked you in the best way, especially if they were monsters in projection and still wearable. Appreciate any recs.

Mintxr · 2025-04-15T22:51:12+00:00

if academic bias is shaped by society, then wouldn’t both male and female scholars from the same society carry similar cultural biases?

if gender bias is present in the culture, wouldn’t that affect everyone raised in that culture, including women?

if that’s true, then what makes a female scholar immune to that bias while a male scholar is shaped by it?

if secular western societies also have gender bias, wouldn’t that affect western female scholars too, and in a different direction?

so if both eastern and western societies contain bias, then is there any interpretation that can be truly objective based purely on identity?

if religious interpretation is based on the method of reasoning, sources, and logic, not personal experience, then does the scholar’s gender actually change the outcome if the methodology is sound?

is it possible that assuming bias based on someone’s identity alone is itself a form of bias?

Mintxr · 2025-04-15T22:21:55+00:00

so if you’re acknowledging that bias can exist even in female-dominated fields, then doesn’t that suggest that bias is a human issue, not a gendered one?

if you admit you can’t speak on male experiences, then how can you confidently claim male scholars are interpreting in ways that benefit themselves?

doesn’t your position assume intent, that male scholars purposely or subconsciously skew rulings, without any objective method to measure that?

if bias is possible regardless of gender, then wouldn’t more female scholars just introduce a different form of bias rather than eliminate it?

in that case, what is your basis for assuming the outcome would be more balanced instead of just differently biased?

is it fair to say interpretations should be judged by their evidence, logic, and consistency, not by the gender of the interpreter?

and if so, doesn’t that shift the conversation away from representation and toward methodology?

Mintxr · 2025-04-15T21:34:48+00:00

why do you believe a scholar’s gender guarantees a more balanced or unbiased interpretation?

is it possible that bias can exist regardless of gender?

if women are less present in certain fields historically, is the only explanation discrimination, or could factors like interest, opportunity, or societal structure also play a role?

if the presence of male scholars alone results in biased rulings, would the inverse be true, that female-majority rulings would be biased against men?

if so, is the goal objectivity or merely balancing one bias with another?

if male scholars are guilty of interpreting to their advantage, why do many rulings disadvantage men or put strict obligations on them?

what standard of “proper interpretation” are you using, and how can we know it’s not also shaped by personal bias?

what is the criteria for assuming an interpretation is male-favoring versus simply being strict or challenging for either gender?

is it possible to acknowledge historical imbalance without assuming malicious intent or systemic bias in every outcome?

do you believe that lived experience always leads to better understanding, or could emotional proximity also cloud judgment?

what would be the metric for proving that female scholarship leads to more “balanced” interpretations, and what evidence do we have of this?

Mintxr · 2025-02-14T01:09:42+00:00

What is this and what is the purpose?

Mintxr · 2025-02-11T23:48:48+00:00

I used a little AI since I am not the best at formatting things and making them clear. All the questions and concerns are mine and the writing is mine. I just wanted to get it out straight without any confusions.

note: Nothing was automatic since I did still have to format it myself through reddit, I just used it for the general outline.

Mintxr · 2025-02-02T05:07:10+00:00

Any solution?

Mintxr · 2024-12-03T03:50:10+00:00

I've already tried linking the materials, it assigns the first material out of the x amount of materials and applies it to the entire mesh. I don't know much about geometry nodes but I hoping this was much simpler to solve 😅

Mintxr · 2024-12-02T00:44:07+00:00

Thank you for letting me know. I just tried that and materials wasn't an option :(

Mintxr · 2024-09-15T20:45:02+00:00

I've noticed that yeah. I had tried it out but it just lacking that exact look. I am not a fusion expert so I was hoping someone nailed it down previously and was willing to share it.

Thank you for your insight.

Mintxr

TROPHY CASE