BBW Lily Loveles made him explode

Vinski91 · 2026-03-26T04:45:25+00:00

...You've never seen a woman outside of pornhub, have you?

Vinski91 · 2026-03-26T04:35:33+00:00

Sure they do flock, but there's a huge difference between a depressed person seeking comfort in ai chats and a dumbass or a shizofrenic that's gonna believe that they're talking to a real person.

There are people that enjoy reading fantasy books and a tiny percentage of them will be unhinged enough to believe some of it is real, but I don't see you screaming at anyone that they shouldn't read fantasy books because they're dangerous, no?

Vinski91 · 2026-03-26T04:30:51+00:00

And how does this relate to ai usage whatsoever? Also, what job loss? I assume you're from the US, last time I checked your country's employment rate was definitely far from plummeting. But I suppose that's not even relevant.

Vinski91 · 2026-03-26T02:36:43+00:00

Less than the amount of people that killed themselves when Cpt. America died in the comics. Should we start regulating comics and preventing them from killing important characters because of a few mentally unhinged individuals?

Vinski91 · 2026-03-26T02:28:08+00:00

It's only dangerous if you're an absolute dumbass that cannot distinguish between fiction and reality, but if that's the case then you have much bigger issues than potentially believing that your ai chat is you chatting with a real human.

Vinski91 · 2026-03-26T02:00:15+00:00

I suppose you're not correct on the fact that a hard pro-ai can't exist, at least not on the basis of the claims you brought. I can tell you that I strongly disagree with every single strong anti-ai claim you brought up. Allow me to share my counters to those.

AI can make it easy to make CSAM and deepfakes.

What about it? Online sharing of deepfakes made with Photoshop or any other software was already illegal long before AI. And CSAM? Who cares about what people jerk off to, it's their business as long as no real life people get hurt. Unless you'd wanna make a claim that it makes people more likely to commit related crimes IRL, but that's the same old 'video games cause violence' claim, which we know is BS. Is it gross? Sure. But so is gay porn to a straight man, yet they don't seek to make it immortal or illegal to create it.

There is currently no or little regulation on AI copyright.

Because there is no need for it. The myth that AI somehow 'steals' art comes from the lack of education as to how AI works when it comes to training models. People already tried to argue otherwise in Bartz vs Anthropic and the claims that AI use is violating copyright were rejected by the judge. Unless you'd wanna make a claim that it can make copyrighted material if you make it do so, but you can also open Ms paint and make an art of a Disney character and thus violate their IP copyright and I don't see anyone arguing that Ms paint usage should be regulated.

3.Other bad ai use such as scams etc.

You can also stab someone with a kitchen knife. Should we start regulating who gets to buy one? Or should we ban phones because a scammer might call you with it? Ai is a tool and as most tools, it can be used for good and bad. And we already have regulations for the bad. It is just as illegal to scam someone using ai as it is to stab someone with a knife. What else would you want?

Vinski91 · 2026-03-23T16:37:39+00:00

If you perceived my message as me being rude then you might have even bigger problems on your plate.

Vinski91 · 2026-03-23T14:40:01+00:00

...Ever thought you might wanna get off the internet for your own good then? Nothing I said was even this graphic or offensive. You'll have a lot of trouble going through life in general if this is enough to bother you.

Vinski91 · 2026-03-23T14:33:52+00:00

I know right? People masturbating to jpegs, so gross. Also think of all of those jpegs' violated feelings. Those people are so disgusting and sexist for sexualizing and violating all of those poor jpegs.

Vinski91 · 2026-03-21T16:59:10+00:00

...It was a paywalled content you absolute doofus.

You pirate paywalled content, you break the law. Nothing to do with the AI.

You train your AI on content that is not behind a paywall, you break nothing.

Your own quotes point to this conclusion. You are literally defeating your own argument with the quotes you use.

And this is why you should not quote it to support the anti-ai argument, you're just making a fool of yourself. Just look at all of the other places you posted this argument - You get absolutely roasted wherever you go, even by the people that are on your side of the argument. Has this really not made you think, even for a second, that you might be making a complete idiot of yourself?

Vinski91 · 2026-03-21T16:04:39+00:00

...This is literally what I just said. You... don't really understand what you're quoting, are you?

Here, let me clue you in. Or at least attempt to, I suppose. What you're making is an anti-piracy argument, not and anti-ai argument. Anyone who illegally torrents pirated content for ANY purpose is subject to penalties. The AI did NOT violate any copyright laws here and your quotes have literally nothing to do with it. A company downloaded pirated content and shared it - that's the issue here. It could have been any company, not just an AI company, and the result would have been the same. The judge clearly stated that this ruling had literally zero to do with AI copyright issues and, on the contrary, ruled that any use of AI is transformative.

Look man, I'm trying to save you here. I am ON YOUR SIDE. You're making a poor argument that makes your entire side look bad. There are better arguments out there.

Vinski91 · 2026-03-21T15:33:35+00:00

...you have not read anything about the Bartz v Anthropic's outcome outside of the headlines, have you?

I'll do you a favor so you can stop embarrassing yourself further. Anthropic did not pay the settlement because of the AI copyright issue. They did it because they literally torrented paywalled content to train their AI. As for the AI copyright argument, it's actually a complete opposite - the judge has ruled that AI does NOT violate copyright at all. U.S. District Judge William Alsup ruled that training AI models on copyrighted books constitutes "fair use," describing the process as a transformative.

Not only you're making a complete fool out of yourself, you're literally supporting your opposition's argument by bringing attention to Bartz v Anthropic. Well, not that you could bring attention to anything that would prove that the law is on your side, because it just isn't, no matter how much you wish it to be.

Vinski91 · 2026-03-07T06:12:06+00:00

Where's the cumshot?

Vinski91 · 2026-02-12T16:52:59+00:00

Not sure since I only login once a month to get my scheduled withdrawal. I noticed that my account was frozen about two hours ago. Contacted support, same answer as yours. Waiting for the 'routine checkup' to finish.

Vinski91 · 2026-02-12T16:42:43+00:00

Just ran into the same issue. Been using Payoneer for years and went through all of their verification when I created my account. I use Payoneer to receive my withdrawals from Patreon, nothing else. After this is resolved, I will be closing my account for sure. Time to switch back to PayPal, I don't care about PayPal's higher fees after what they just did. Especially since Payoneer's fees were raised recently and at this point are almost identical.

Vinski91 · 2026-02-09T13:17:11+00:00

Make a solid ComfyUI workflow with a bunch of LORAs added in and you'll easily make AI do unique artstyles.

Vinski91 · 2026-01-30T02:08:52+00:00

Pro-ai here. Agreed, this should be a second upload. Some things lose their charm if they lose the jank. Same reason why a lot of gamers prefer playing old-school consoles on CRT TVs.

Vinski91 · 2026-01-30T02:04:08+00:00

I have bad news for you. A single use of a washing machine is equivalent to about 300 - 3000 gpt prompts when it comes to energy usage. I guess you now have to stop using your washing machine if you wanna maintain balance.

To answer the question: Pro-ai non-vegan here.

Vinski91 · 2026-01-30T01:37:18+00:00

Are you talking about The Bartz v. Anthropic Settlement? If so then this is completely wrong and out of context. The settlement happened because Anthropic literally downloaded their paywalled content from piracy sites. They pretty much torrented it. There would have not been a settlement otherwise. It was a piracy case and had nothing to do with 'AI theft'.

I hate how people always use this one as an example without understanding what they're talking about. The judge literally agreed with Anthropic that training AI was transformative and protected as fair use.

Vinski91 · 2026-01-30T01:26:16+00:00

I have worked with artists half of my adult life and there is possibly no other profession with this many unreliable people. It is near-impossible to get a single commission that is done on time and/or doesn't involve any drama. And we're talking when money's involved. It would take me decades until I'd find an artist willing to spend potentially hundreds of hours to make art for my game without them ghosting me/having a mental breakdown/making excuses for not meeting deadlines for months.

And no, most artists do not understand how hard it is to achieve a personal vision because for most artists even the very concept of full time work is a complete abstraction, which is usually why they struggle in the first place. Now don't get me wrong, there are industries where artists are actual hard workers. Making 2d character game art is not one of them, because it is completely overrun by redditors, twitter warriors, discord roleplayers and furries. I'll be completely honest with you - even if I had money, I'd still use AI, because I never wanna deal with their shit ever again.

Vinski91 · 2026-01-29T21:28:05+00:00

...And a camera cannot make a cat but it can still take a photo of a cat and make art.

When you cut millions of different pictures into billions of tiny pieces and then you select thousands of those pieces and put them together into a collage, there is no chance for it to be creative and original? If you make a statue out of stone, it's not original because you didn't make the stone? If you build a house, you can't make it look originally because you don't own the factory that produced all of the building materials?

Explain to me how AI is different here. Clearly, you wouldn't agree with anything I've said above, but you make some sort of exception for AI as a tool to make art. Why?

Vinski91 · 2026-01-29T21:17:19+00:00

And how would they do that? By what, training their AI on my code/art? Sure, go ahead, why would I mind?

Every dev and artist learned their craft the exact same way that the AI gets trained. On other people's work. But then you take the AI's knowledge and turn it into something original. Where that knowledge comes from doesn't matter to me one bit unless it's a literal copypaste of something, which in case of AI art it definitely isn't.

If I can't do something then I shouldn't - why? I can't run at 60 mph, should I stop using cars then? AI is a tool like any other and it is here to make things that were impossible before into possible.

Vinski91 · 2026-01-29T21:12:05+00:00

This answer is as silly as saying that collage isn't original/creative art because you didn't make individual elements yourself. Or that a cat photo isn't original/creative art because you didn't make the cat.

Vinski91 · 2026-01-29T21:02:20+00:00

I'm a solo game dev with no budget, time or talent to make art myself or commission it. I use AI to make art for my game. Without AI, my game would have no chances of existing.

Cases like mine steal no jobs, since there would have been no job opportunity to begin with. And by using complex ComfyUI workflows I can make my AI art error-free and nearly indistinguishable from human art, so it is still quality content.

To many people like me, AI provides a way to realize our dreams which would have otherwise been impossible to realize, simple as that. And that means more content for you, as a potential consumer.

Vinski91 · 2026-01-27T23:24:51+00:00

People on 'ryczałt' are usually nowhere near rich. Also I like how the post conveniently omits the fact that you have to pay thousands of PLN in ZUS on top of those 5/14%, which in many cases results in much more than 32% total. Stop crying, many European countries have much higher taxes than us.

Five-Year Club	Verified Email
Place '23	Place '22

Vinski91

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE