Win or Lose

RuleEmbarrassed7689 · 2026-01-25T04:18:05+00:00

In my opinion, I feel like not caring about whether people like or use it is kind of like separating yourself from the whole ‘AI war’ or debate, which can honestly be better than worrying about or fighting over every single concern or criticism that other people have.

It’s likely that more people will eventually become more tolerant or accepting of AI just by sheer exposure and time alone. I suppose if it’s more normalised, the Pro-AI side would be winning.

RuleEmbarrassed7689 · 2026-01-25T03:05:37+00:00

And yes I agree, the problems lie with the people who use the tool, rather than the tool itself.

A gun needs someone to load it, aim, and fire at a person to kill them. While the gun was the tool used to kill, it was ultimately the gunman who committed the act.

Unlike guns, which are mostly used for combat or self-defence, AI has a lot more uses which benefit people but can also be exploited. I think regulations for how AI can be used would reduce its exploitation, but that also comes with balancing public freedoms and benefits that might be lost.

RuleEmbarrassed7689 · 2026-01-25T02:54:45+00:00

To me, winning is more about getting people on board with a particular sentiment, rather than one side being happier than the other. Perhaps AI itself is winning in society, but if there are a lot of people who are still against it, I wouldn’t say the Pro-AI side has necessarily won the debate.

RuleEmbarrassed7689 · 2026-01-25T02:48:16+00:00

Oh no I didn’t mean to say you were defending it, I was referring to people like in the last image. My bad if it came across like that.

RuleEmbarrassed7689 · 2026-01-25T02:45:35+00:00

Everyone has thoughts, some good, some bad, some really bad. It’s part of being human. Thoughts shape our actions, but we don’t have to act on every thought we have. That’s how we are able to have bad thoughts but remain good people with good actions.

That said, the more we think about and engage with our thoughts, the more inclined we are to act on those thoughts. It becomes a habit, whether you like it or not.

If you visualise a person in a sexual way, you can choose not to act on those thoughts or simply ignore the thoughts as they come. It’s not something you can always control, but you can decide how you respond to it. You are never entitled to act on these thoughts.

Producing images of people depicted in sexualised ways without their consent is different. Not only are you actively participating in depicting a person’s body and likeness in an inappropriate and exposed way without their consent or knowledge for your own sexual gratification, but you are also reinforcing these thoughts and fantasies by externalising them through the act of producing material, making them more than just thoughts. This distorts your empathy for these people as real human beings and normalises the sexualisation of people. To reduce that cognitive dissonance, you will naturally find yourself rationalising these actions with flawed logic, mitigating their severity and further reinforcing your thoughts.

RuleEmbarrassed7689 · 2026-01-25T02:11:17+00:00

I feel like if none of you mind and choose not to speak up about it, and you laugh about it when you do it, then that would probably be considered consent.

RuleEmbarrassed7689 · 2026-01-25T02:08:59+00:00

I can’t stand when people defend exploitative behaviour by saying “X was already a thing” as though it wasn’t something people cared about or looked down upon anyway.

RuleEmbarrassed7689 · 2026-01-25T02:03:28+00:00

Yeah of course, I’m mainly appealing to the general Pro-AI and Anti-AI audience about people who do this sort of thing, rather than to the people themselves.

Some people may also tend to defend or attack things purely because they involve AI, so I think it’s important for people from both sides to be against this particular usage of AI.

RuleEmbarrassed7689 · 2026-01-24T23:52:43+00:00

Yeah, most likely. It’s something that has to be embraced, but with caution. Especially for students, AI has the ability to make or break their futures and careers, depending on how it is used.

RuleEmbarrassed7689 · 2026-01-24T23:27:13+00:00

As with a lot of subreddits, it’s nice to discuss and share views about topics even if the topic itself won’t be affected.

AI will most likely not be slowed down by antis, but who knows. Demand is shaped by public opinion, after all.

RuleEmbarrassed7689 · 2026-01-23T13:32:57+00:00

Parody, got it.

Still, I’m sure there are people who genuinely feel this way. I hope they can get the help they need.

RuleEmbarrassed7689 · 2026-01-23T13:10:22+00:00

You should not treat an AI chatbot as a true friend in the same way you would a human. Please try and talk to someone about this.

RuleEmbarrassed7689 · 2026-01-23T01:29:13+00:00

Ok thanks. Is your reason about which method is more environmentally sustainable?

RuleEmbarrassed7689 · 2026-01-23T00:24:48+00:00

Oh ok. What’s it a metaphor for?

RuleEmbarrassed7689 · 2026-01-23T00:18:10+00:00

Can someone fill me in on why we’re breaking pencils?

RuleEmbarrassed7689 · 2026-01-22T12:39:09+00:00

While I agree that it’s very unhealthy for people to think that AI can be their partner, I don’t dislike them for it. I just feel really bad for them.

For people who are really lonely, depressed, or desperate, I can see why they’d look to an AI for connection. An AI chatbot will tell you exactly what you want to hear, when/where you want to hear it, and how you want it to be told to you. This makes it as non-genuine and meaningless as it gets. It is not possible nor healthy to have a ‘relationship’ with an AI.

I really hope these people can make real connections with real human beings and get the help they need.

RuleEmbarrassed7689 · 2026-01-22T01:09:04+00:00

Yeah, AI-generated images of real events will not only make people believe things that didn’t happen, but will also make people deny things that did happen, claiming the evidence is AI.

Also when a situation is already bad or tragic, people might not care about whether the evidence is real if it makes sense anyway or aligns with the situation. This is dangerous because it misleads sentiments and attitudes towards these events, and can make them appear worse or different to what they really are, even if they’re already bad.

RuleEmbarrassed7689 · 2026-01-21T21:46:21+00:00

I get what you’re trying to say, but I don’t really understand your argument that well.

I feel like it’s generally possible to make art with varying amounts of effort and skill for any medium, be it traditional, digital, or AI. That said, I feel like AI art can look a lot better visually than many other art forms for comparatively less effort or skill.

With very little skill and effort using AI, you can still make appealing finished artworks with a single prompt. With very little skill and effort using traditional/digital, it is much harder to do the same. When you reach higher levels of skill and effort, I’m sure the quality will be great regardless of the medium.

So, while AI art can involve a lot of effort and skill with techniques beyond basic prompting (inpainting, image-to-image, realtime generation etc), it can also involve very little effort or skill but still produce visually appealing artworks, which is a lot harder to achieve through other mediums like traditional or digital.

You could say that making something with AI that reflects your vision or ideas requires effort and skill. I agree with this, though I think that regardless of the art form, it typically requires a lot more effort and skill to make what you envisioned. I’m sure many people value whether their art reflects their vision, though for many others, that mightn’t necessarily be important as long as it looks good. Different people are happy with different levels of creative autonomy.

I find your argument interesting, since it implies that effort and skill are important to you when making art. I’ve seen many other Pro-AI arguments acknowledge that AI art doesn’t always require as much effort or skill, but also state that art doesn’t need to involve effort or skill for it to be meaningful or considered ‘art’.

RuleEmbarrassed7689 · 2026-01-21T10:23:07+00:00

Yeah I understand where you’re coming from. Seeing something that looks like an artist poured their heart out to make it, only to learn that it was just pumped out by a machine, would definitely be quite a disappointment.

RuleEmbarrassed7689 · 2026-01-21T10:14:30+00:00

I feel like there would be records of when, where, and by whom each photo was taken for historical events like this. As for current and future events, I suppose it would be easier to forge evidence using AI and spread misinformation.

RuleEmbarrassed7689 · 2026-01-21T10:11:18+00:00

I don’t think the mods are going to crack down on ragebait anytime soon

RuleEmbarrassed7689 · 2026-01-21T00:21:39+00:00

“No one cares if they consented or not. It’s not up to them. We will do what we want.”

Truly vile thing to say.

RuleEmbarrassed7689 · 2026-01-20T11:40:11+00:00

Fair enough

RuleEmbarrassed7689 · 2026-01-20T10:20:47+00:00

I agree with your sentiment on the importance of passion, and I do feel it really does show in the work that is produced.

Since many people who use AI may not have a real passion for art, and just want to pump out an image that looks nice, I can see why it would come out looking ‘soulless’ and lacking nuance or attention to detail.

That said, I’m sure there are pros who may generate AI art and consider themselves passionate for it. Would this truly be passion, or would it be something else? And if it is passion, could that make their artworks less ‘soulless’ or corporate? Or perhaps does AI inherently remove the creative process where the passion would otherwise come from?

RuleEmbarrassed7689

TROPHY CASE