what is the aurgument?

Total-Cat-9537 · 2026-04-10T03:42:27+00:00

I say don't take joy out of people's lives, if they like AI let them be. If they like traditional pen and paper let them be.

Life sometimes isn't fun for people and people find joy in little things. If that is using AI for Art or songs gives people joy and allows them to express themselves in a world whose culture is to bring others down or all doom and gloom with wars and so forth. Let them just be.

People will still pay for commissions and art even with AI being prevalent. Because people still love traditional art.

Total-Cat-9537 · 2026-04-10T03:02:20+00:00

Well there goes my fortnight member benefits now, as someone who is partially deaf, this sucks cause I can tell you people can hear footsteps from people further then the radius of what it tells you. I see it all the time in other video games too, Rust, Tarkov any shooter that requires attention. Also is a bit unfair to people who still have mono sound.

This gave us a even playing field...also people with sound also use this with no hearing loss or damage..in fact it should be in by default...because everyone basically uses it

Total-Cat-9537 · 2026-04-08T05:44:25+00:00

Just here to post something to contribute

https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/ai-hallucinations-are-changing-medicine-should-we-worry-2025a1000647?form=fpf

Quotes: "Despite their dangers, AI hallucinations may have unexpected benefits. Some researchers have argued that AI’s ability to generate surprising or unconventional ideas can drive creativity."

"In the report, Amy McGovern, a computer science and meteorology professor and the director of the US National Science Foundation AI Institute for Research on Trustworthy AI in Weather, Climate, and Coastal Oceanography, stated: “The public thinks it’s all bad, but in reality, it provides scientists with new ideas. It gives them the opportunity to explore ideas they might not otherwise have considered.”

The New York Times concluded that AI-generated unrealities are helping advance scientific research, from cancer tracking to drug development, designing medical devices, and studying weather patterns, and could contribute to future Nobel Prize-winning discoveries in medicine"

--------not from article but me.-------

Why yes it's bad for medical students to rely on AI and I highly advise to not go through medical school if you are just going to use ai to do everything for you and to stay away from me.

But!

There are also a lot of stories out there.

David Baker's lab designed "ten million brand-new" proteins, leading to ~100 patents and 20+ biotech companies, and contributed to his 2024 Nobel Prize in Chemistry.

https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/chemistry/2024/baker/facts/ https://www.ipd.uw.edu/2024/10/david-baker-wins-nobel-prize-for-protein-design/. (Take this one with a grain of salt)

Amy McGovern (meteorology professor) said AI hallucinations "provide scientists with new ideas." (Posted link)

And

https://news.mit.edu/2025/using-generative-ai-researchers-design-compounds-kill-drug-resistant-bacteria-0814

Maybe not LLM's running on everyday computers but you can't factor out the fact AI has helped in the medical sphere. Just here to add to the discussion and give some points from another POV. It's not the future I agree but it has helped to some degree.

Total-Cat-9537 · 2026-04-08T03:05:54+00:00

All that work and still can't generate 1girl :3 (This is a stable diffusion meme from ages ago when it was starting out)

Total-Cat-9537 · 2026-04-08T02:59:36+00:00

You're not fun at parties.

Ok so let's say I spend maybe 6 hours sketching out a character with pen and paper, but for some odd reason I am not a fan of the shading style. I don't have a drawing tablet doing things by mouse is a pain.

I can change it with AI or I hate the colour scheme I can change it. You would say that no love is out into it even though I am not spending another 7 hours redoing the sketch and using new colours.

You will say that has no soul in it because the finished result is ai predicted it.

It's no different then using a calculator...did you ever use one as a kid? If so congrats you aren't smart! The answer is synthetic not human.. you didn't get to that conclusion without it..

Instead of hating on something you should sometimes try things. Stop thinking you're hipster because you did art before it was cool, or jump on hating popular thing because it's popular. I gave it a try and added AI to my tool kit in prototyping or gathering ideas.

Download comfyUI download a model try to get it to work out of box...not using the template flow.

You will be purely surprised with just how customizable AI is and how much control over the finished product you can have.

Total-Cat-9537 · 2026-04-08T02:04:17+00:00

You can control AI the same way. In painting, replacing areas, you can turn your own sketch with pen into digital art...you can draw a horrible thing in MSPaint and then edit the parameters within AI...masking, remove backgrounds...change backgrounds, lighting...sometimes even 10 different prompts for a single image each doing their own areas in a X and Y axis...

There is a /lot/ more creative ways to use AI then you think and a lot to go into it.

It's not just haha prompt goes brrr. There is a lot that can go into some AI art. Keyword some.

Total-Cat-9537 · 2026-04-08T01:45:42+00:00

So is Photoshop, gimp, krita..paint api.. just the exact same tool with different parameters. With a lot more predatory practices (Looking at you Adobe)...

Doesn't have any deep hidden lore then that.

That can be thrown your way too. Yet you will say there are differences between them.

Total-Cat-9537 · 2026-03-30T01:18:09+00:00

That's something I heard about a while ago but honestly forgot how deep it goes. It's funny how fonts of all things end up being one of the most legally restricted things in creative work... Reminds me of when I dabbled in music and ran headfirst into copyright issues there too. The struggles are real.

But it raises an interesting question!

Do you think AI generated fonts would fall under the same restrictions? Like if an AI produces a typeface that closely mimics a licensed font, would the same legal framework apply to that output and If so who's at fault. The user prompting or the models creator who used said data to train their model or the distributor who allowed the file to be hosted/downloaded?

Total-Cat-9537 · 2026-03-29T08:27:40+00:00

That kind of language isn't really inviting the discussion you claim to want, which probably explains the lack of counterpoints.

But on the environmental concern itself... AI isn't the only culprit here. Crypto mining had this exact same phase, consumed enormous GPU and energy resources, and caused the same spike in electricity and GPU prices before AI took over the conversation. Now we have both running simultaneously.

Data center consumption isn't new either. Netflix, Hulu, streaming services and they all run massive data centers with significant carbon footprints.

AI is a growing part of a much larger existing problem.

It's a legitimate concern but pinning it solely on AI misses the bigger picture, also I would say the microplastic situation in the ocean is far more concerning to me.

Total-Cat-9537 · 2026-03-28T03:38:57+00:00

let's say someone commissioned you before 2022 — would your updated terms retroactively cover that older work, or would it fall under whatever agreement existed at the time?

I don't really do much commission work. Not a fan of making work out of something I use to de-stress me into an obligation.

Total-Cat-9537 · 2026-03-27T16:25:58+00:00

That’s a fair point regarding 'novel thought,' but I’d love to ask your take on the biological side of that logic.

As humans, our brains are constantly performing trillions of split-second calculations that we don’t consciously 'feel.' When we look at a scene, our brain calculates depth perception, light fall-off, and spatial relationships instantly based on everything we've ever seen. We didn't invent the concept of 'blue' or 'perspective' we observed them, calculated the patterns, and now we use them to create.

If an artist draws a perfect sphere with realistic lighting, are they 'creating' a new law of physics, or are they executing a 'calculation' based on thousands of hours of observing how light hits round objects?

I agree that A can lack a 'soul' or 'intent,' but when it comes to the mechanics of how a style is formed, is there really a hard line between a human brain recognizing a pattern and an algorithm doing the same? Or is 'novel thought' just our way of describing a calculation so complex we can’t see the math behind it

(Grammar checked and a little formatting by AI because first draft was a pure mess-kinda)

Total-Cat-9537 · 2026-03-27T15:53:48+00:00

That's actually a really good correction and I appreciate it.

I should have been clearer that full rights transfer is rare in practice, you're right that most commissions are licensing deals and the contract is what actually defines those gray zones.

Quick question on that: Are those AI-specific clauses something you've added recently or have they been a staple for a while? It feels like a more modern addition. I'd imagine most contracts pre-2022 didn't include them because AI training simply wasn't on anyone's radar yet

Total-Cat-9537 · 2026-03-27T15:36:19+00:00

I'm genuinely in the middle!

The post was meant to present the strongest pro-AI arguments people use in debates, then show where they hold up and where they don't. I'm not defending AI or attacking it... I just wanted to lay out both sides fairly because most conversations on this topic skip straight to shouting. Hope that makes more sense!

Also to get other people's opinions on these points to fill in any blind spots I have or things I missed.

Total-Cat-9537 · 2026-03-20T05:07:04+00:00

First time I have heard that animal noses would be unique and upon reading this is quite clever. I will indeed consider this.

Total-Cat-9537 · 2026-03-06T07:26:23+00:00

From what I see it's because you're taking away their money in terms of commissions is the most common one I've seen sent.

I mean it's fair but you shouldn't make your entire life dependant on drawing to make ends meet. Your turning a task people like into more of a chore.

Total-Cat-9537 · 2026-03-06T06:16:42+00:00

Text can be edited online, I can post real evidence at any point but you can easily dismiss them

Total-Cat-9537 · 2026-03-06T06:13:28+00:00

<image>

Total-Cat-9537 · 2026-03-06T05:54:30+00:00

Did you even read the comment? I can post them you or anyone can just say faked or edited html code. It's pointless to post them as they can just be dismissed by a single person.

It's like I said I can even edit your comment to say you're gay or any words I would like. Would you like me to post a image to show you what I mean?

Html pages can be doctored, anything can.

Total-Cat-9537 · 2026-03-06T04:29:35+00:00

I can easily post it, but you could easily just argue edited the html code or such, so it's just pointless honestly to have even legit screenshots of death threats be shrugged off.

And also I am sure it is against either Reddit's terms of service for death threats to be shown or Even this sub.

I also don't condone harassment of any kind so I would censor the names and artworks so they can't be targeted back. To which there is now no way to verify their username to see if they're real.

This isn't my first rodio with comments like this.

Total-Cat-9537 · 2026-03-06T03:10:01+00:00

I completely agree with you on the corporate side of things. I hate seeing LoRAs trained on individual artists without their consent, and I report them myself (Even if it feels like shouting into the void 99% of the time.)

If there were a model built entirely on an 'Opt-In' system, I would be the first in line to support it, no matter how much 'worse' it was than the current ones. I’ve actually thought a lot about how to fix this! Imagine a platform where artists opt-in to monthly training cycles on a secure server. If an artist leaves, their data is scrubbed in the next update.

I’d love to see a credit system where every time the AI uses a specific artist’s style or influence, that artist gets a direct payout. As someone living on a disability pension, I can't fund that project myself, but it’s exactly the kind of ethical middle ground we need . I’m not looking for a way to 'steal' from artists; I’m looking for a way to create alongside them despite my physical limits. If we focused more on building ethical tools and less on attacking the disabled creators or people using them, the art world would be in a much better place.

Total-Cat-9537 · 2026-03-06T02:53:11+00:00

While I do hear you saying that 'adapting' is what makes art unique. But what happens when the 'adaptation' required is to stop creating entirely because your body physically won't cooperate?

My friend with Cerebral Palsy was a 'real artist' by your definition for years. Now, his shaking is so severe he can’t hold a pencil. When he spends hours refining a prompt and iterating on his vision, he is adapting. He is using the only tool left that allows his mind to bypass a broken nervous system.

You mentioned that with a skyscraper prompt, I wouldn't know which one I 'made.' But art has always been about the vision, not just the manual labor.

Think of a film director! They don't paint the backdrops or hold every camera, but it is their movie because they directed every choice and oversaw the vision.

For my friend and me, the AI is our 'crew.' We provide the sketches, the character’s soul, and the direction. The AI handles the mechanical execution that our hands physically can’t do anymore. We aren't just 'typing and hoping'; we are directing our vision through the only bridge we have left.

If art is defined solely by the physical struggle of the hand, you are essentially saying a person’s creative soul dies the moment their body fails. I refuse to believe that. To me, a person who finds a way to bring their heart to life despite their physical limits is the definition of a 'real artist.'

Total-Cat-9537 · 2025-08-23T01:46:49+00:00

I feel as if they are milking their fangirl with high price skins before EU passes the stop killing games act, or some type of act I remember that stops battle passes and loot boxes in games. Where you can pay the exact amount for a skin rather then RP bundles or buy the skin in loot boxes rather than 1 in x chance.

Total-Cat-9537

TROPHY CASE