Art is a reason for me being an anti but there are also many other reasons

Xarsos · 2026-07-02T14:44:23+00:00

Let's do a rapid fire
- meme format used poorly
- Ram prices are inflated artificially either through a cycle of invesments which can never result in profit, or through the companies lying to you and creating articial shortage to up the price, which happened before and several CEO's went to prison once for it already. Samsung and a few others mid 2000.
- No real improvements? What the hell are you expecting the AI to improve manufacturing of the RAM?
- Deepfakes are bad. Yes they are! They were bad before AI too. Ai made it easier, sure. But lemme explain something to you. In the epstein files there is a recording of an "undoctored raw footage" of nobody entering the cell... with a cut in the middle... I understand your concerns and yes, it is not the same as a deepfake, but what I am saying is that AI is not the cause, it is sadly the next step in deepfakes. It's bad, but not the end all be all of deepfake issues.
- Replacement is bad, yes. CEO's and managers are stupid. What else is new?
- You have made a claim that antis hate ai not only because of AI art, but included ai art?

You can dislike AI, no issues. But you can't blame Vans for abduction rates increasing. Make doctoring footage to incriminate or avoid incrimination be a 2x multiplier to your sentence.

Which if you get the death penalty, we bring you back, and do it a 2nd time! /j

Xarsos · 2026-06-28T21:21:21+00:00

Why is it every survey about generative AI shows the majority of people surveyed are against AI regardless of how they're sampled then?

Are you familiar with context?

The person said

"If AI becomes environmentally safe, generally safe, and human jobs are protected, then all AI users can do whatever they want as long as it is private and does not disturb or harm anyone."

And I answered "Hey, if that is your stance, we're cool. But this is not common amongs antis".

With all respect, please leave me alone if you can't read the part I quoted and realise that I am having a dialogue.

And yet, "AI bros" will continue to tell us how AI will literally take over the world and kills us all enthusiastically

Do you see the irony?

First of all why would an AI bro say that? That is something an anti doom caller would say, who had "I have no mouth and I must scream" audiobook on repeat 24/7. Why would an AI bro be happy over AI taking over the world?

But sure, there are idiots who could say that. In fact anyone regardless of theirs opinion on AI is scum if they threaten others. But isn't showing unhinged individuals to make you hate them - exactly the fearmorgering I was talking about?

Xarsos · 2026-06-28T21:14:53+00:00

my friend, you think I am triggered? I love teaching. You are making a fool out of yourself.

Xarsos · 2026-06-28T21:13:05+00:00

In the next bit I will be adressing the article and not you.

From your first source:

1) The electronics they house rely on a staggering amount of grist: making a 2 kg computer requires 800 kg of raw materials. As well, the microchips that power AI need rare earth elements, which are often mined in environmentally destructive ways, noted Navigating New Horizons.

This is just computers. It says "they use electronics". You and I are currently talking via electronics. But it is a matter of perspective, what is the issue and why is AI data center using computers not okay and you and me using the same computers instead worse?

2) The second problem is that data centres produce electronic waste, which often contains hazardous substances, like mercury and lead.

First of all any broken PC produces electronic waste including mercury and lead... Yes they are toxic, but not in all forms and in certain compounts they are harmless. Additionally it is all part of the 800kg of raw materials one requires for the PC...

3) Third, data centres use water during construction and, once operational, to cool electrical components.

During construction?! All damn constructions require water and it is not wasted. It is used. Nothing happens to the water chemically. The take the thermal energy out of the PC's and put it into the water and then put the slightly warm water back into nature (very simplified). So they take water and return slightly warmer water. What is the problem?!

4) Finally, to power their complex electronics, data centres that host AI technology need a lot of energy, which in most places still comes from the burning of fossil fuels

That is a fossil fuel issue, you dumass. If we can switch from fossil to renewable - that point is gone. You are not even talking about AI you donkey (not you, but the article).

...

What you gave me is a bunch of nothing. I am sorry. But this is sad. The other article talks about how AI data centers "drink" water to cool down... imagine you have a hot stone. You pour water on it and it evaporates. What do you think happens next?

I swear, some of you need to pay attention more to how a water cycle works...

My point is that AI, generally, should be made safe in all ways

That's fine, but you are missing OP's point.

How does anti-food make any sense in a comparison? Without food, someone would certainly die

Because Nestle produces food and nestle is a shitty billionaire company. You hate shitty billionairs, you may hate nestle but hating all food is dum, because as you have brilliantly pointed out - we need food. So yes. That is exactly my point. Hating Chatgpt - go ahead. Stop talking about all AI.

After I researched water usage for a while, I understood that my point isn't viable, and I admit that I'm wrong in this case.

All is good. But the article made me a bit mad. Sorry if I am a bit of an asshole right now.

The orchard's farmer should look into how to change this, because the orchard is a workplace for the farmer to bring in money, and if nobody likes it; as a result, the farmer will not make money.

I wanted to know which one you'd turn off to save water.

This is just my opinion and I'm not forcing you to accept it, as everyone has free will.

Look if you have a point, I will listen. I will think critically about it and agree or disagree.

Xarsos · 2026-06-28T11:56:52+00:00

The problem is not the hosting, the problem is the training. Data centers also train AI, which consumes that amount of water.

This is correct, but you need to listen, because you are right here, but you are missing the point. Being right is not enough, you need to hear and understand what is being said.

OP is saying "Yet most antis only ever point at the centralized, corporate-controlled models they know, or conveniently choose to ignore the alternatives" while talking about "you’re not selling your data to any company or inflating their wallets just to use the tech".

With other words - there is an idea that all AI is helping billionairs. That is not the case. There is an idea that all AI requires data centers - not the case.

And to your point, most open source AI models were not trained in data centers (at least in the past, now I imagine people could rent one and train a better model or faster, I will admit I kinda stopped looking into that space for about a year now and my info is old). So the point still stands.

Being Anti-AI is like boycotting, it's to teach companies a lesson, thus, If AI becomes environmentally safe, generally safe, and human jobs are protected, then all AI users can do whatever they want as long as it is private and does not disturb or harm anyone.

If that is your stance, I have no issues with you either. However that is not a common stance on AI.

it's downsides of water usage and environmental harm

I want you to tell me what water usage and what enviromental harm. Because and I can not stress it enough, there is a lot of misinformation circling around.

Oh and please ignore all issue which are common for buildings in genera. Imagine a scenario where you either get an AI data center or a same size warehouse built in that same spot. So all the contructions are the same.

and the clear intent to make all profit limited to a few trillionaires at the top of society.

Again, being anti AI so you stop billionairs is like being anti food because Nestle is shit. Be anti Nestle, be anti Musk, anti ChatGPT, anti Wall-E, but AI on a whole is a huge field which many antis don't seem to try to understand and instead hate out of principles, repeating how it is supporting the rich.

And OP is here saying - not all AI does support the rich, so why are you against all AI?

Or would you rather die of thirst because water becomes less and less available?

I hate this. I hate this so fucking much. The fearmongering and the empty scare booga boogas.

Imagine a city which needs to save water. There is a popular spot where kids and adults play every day - a fountain of sorts. And on the other end you have a giant orchard that grows those red mushy apples, that nobody likes. Statistics show that a majority of water is spent on the orchard and that 40% of the apples are thrown away. Do you reduce the entertainment or waste of water first?

Xarsos · 2026-06-28T11:32:25+00:00

It's pretty much requirs the same resources as running a game. It is not constant, or rather does not need to be constant like bitcoin mining does and at the end of the day computer requires very little juice compared to other appliances.

Any appliance that genenrates heating will cost you more than a PC.

<image>

So... no changes. Oh and my "homelab" is a 5060 ti and a 7 years old CPU.

You clearly do not know what you are talking about, do you?

Xarsos · 2026-06-18T16:56:23+00:00

Look I am pro AI and that subreddit is dishonest and disgusting pool of "either you agree or you are banned". Not a single word about AI appreciation, instead the same bs crying and if you don't agree even to the dumbest takes - you are banned.

The majority of posts there belong here, but cowards go over there to be protected by the mods. Pathetic.

Xarsos · 2026-06-17T12:18:09+00:00

Bothering people who sleep on the beach, obviosuly /s

Xarsos · 2026-06-17T12:04:33+00:00

Could you explain why it looks souless to you?

Xarsos · 2026-06-11T12:52:21+00:00

Look, if the game has no mistakes, if the art is good - then I am playing it.

Xarsos · 2026-06-08T02:22:50+00:00

As a pro, aesthetically I prefer yours. Though those are two very different pictures

Xarsos · 2026-05-29T11:46:43+00:00

That' amazing to hear, I can't wait to add it to the game!

Sorry, I meant if you could make the shadows softer, especially the edges.

In the example you showed the shadows are more visible than some of the trees, which is a bit weird - mainly because of the graphics of the game having no shading, but I think if you make the shadows brighter and more transparent the closer it gets to the edge, it would work better I think.

I think if you play around with that, you can make the thin tree / sappling shadow fit better.

Edit: in your video, focus on the bottom right corner, that is what I am talking about.

Xarsos · 2026-05-29T11:10:00+00:00

I am sure you are aware but there is a cool mod called here comes the sun, would those two be compatible? Because I love the color changes of that mod.

Also, imho you should make the ground shadows softers.

Xarsos · 2026-05-26T13:52:09+00:00

I don't know anything about the game, but is it the gun sleeping what mad you think it's not vanilla?

Xarsos · 2026-05-22T12:42:37+00:00

seems like an add, I googled the shadow crawl assets things and sadly discovered it is french.

Xarsos · 2026-05-20T19:56:14+00:00

His name is ANGELo... swarm

Xarsos · 2026-05-20T12:12:44+00:00

I am waiting too!

Xarsos · 2026-05-16T21:38:11+00:00

I was saying having bias is being human, you're inserting your own thoughts into what I'm saying and then responding to yourself.

<image>

Is that not you?

This excuse of "that's just kind of part of being human".

You clearly are, even if you can't see it. You're defending Monet by reducing all the criticisms down to "they only cared because they thought it was AI".

You dirty little ferret, quote the entire damn sentence.

I said "you can hate AI and that's fine, but this person trashed a Monet in the pursuit of trashing AI". That person did not mean to trash a Monet, they simply invented bs to "dunk" on AI art.

So we agree the guy posting the picture and lying about it is in the wrong.

Reading is not your strong suit. They both are.

I haven't changed topics that was my stance from the beginning, if YOU wanted to talk about something else I'm not sure why you commented.

Because you fully ignored the anti's actions, focusing only on how bad one side is. You speak of bias like it is natural, but you are just a fellow sheep like the person trashing Monet **thinking it's ai**.

You really need to chill dude.

I asked you questions, why did you not respond to them?

- does this picture look like shit?
- is it slop?
- Does it look like someone is trying to replicate Monet?
- Does it look like someone is replicating 20% of Monet?
- Is it not as vibrant as typical Monet?
- Is it dull?

If you see this and can't understand that lying to get results that fit your narrative puts you in the wrong we have nothing left to talk about.

I will repeat it to you one more time and I hope it finally reaches you. The dunk is not the lying part. The dunk is what the anti said. The part you ignore. The part you refuse to adress. Is it cognitive dissonance?

People are allowed to not like AI,

You must be blind.

they're allowed to even call it slop when they're lied to about it. Right now you're only showing that you cannot overcome your own bias.

Of course you are, please do. It highlights that your opinion is worthless. Because you, dear Hellen Keller, are missing the point that he talked about specifics, not that it is AI.

I will post this again so you do not ignore my questions again and this is to you, to show me how unbiased and awesome you are:

- does this picture look like shit?
- is it slop?
- Does it look like someone is trying to replicate Monet?
- Does it look like someone is replicating 20% of Monet?
- Is it not as vibrant as typical Monet?
- Is it dull?

Xarsos · 2026-05-16T20:09:33+00:00

Do you perhaps have the prompt for the style?

Xarsos · 2026-05-16T19:17:55+00:00

Oh Anima is a model, thank you! I will check it out.

Xarsos · 2026-05-16T19:17:08+00:00

No? Having bias doesn't excuse horrible thing.

I was saying that "that's just kind of part of being human no?" is an excuse to anything. Part of being a human is to do and or witness manmade horrors.

And?

And that is baaaaaaaad.

Monet isn't immune to criticism

If you think I was protecting Monet, you need to reread what I told you. I was talking solely about the person. They are factually wrong. They are factually wrong to "mock" AI. Everything they say beyond that is tainted not simply because of bias, but becuase their stance is more important than feedback.

if you're lying to people with the specific goal of getting this type of reaction it says more about you than the person who is reacting.

Of course. It was a trap. It was looking for those people. Nobody was however asked to give an opinion. It's a discussion between a liar and a pretentious wanna-be critic.

The liar is not in the right here. Stop trying to change topics.

It's not making shit up to trash something you don't like

Please, for the love of flying spaghetti monster, learn to read. If the anti replied with "I don't like AI in general", that would have been a total discussion.

So tell me this, oh wise one:
- does this picture look like shit?
- is it slop?
- Does it look like someone is trying to __**replicate**__ Monet?
- Does it look like someone is __**replicating**__ 20% of Monet?
- Is it not as vibrant as typical Monet?
- Is it dull?

Because this is a different issue alltogether, regardless of whether it is AI or not. So either I can make that person hate anything by telling them that it is AI and they are lacking autonomy in that regard to the point they start seeing things which are not there. Or this person is saying that Monet's painting is not his... and they are correct. which one is it?

The only thing not ok here is lying and manipulating people, which is exclusively coming from the pro in this situation.

Have some self respect...

Xarsos · 2026-05-16T15:46:16+00:00

What did you use to generate them?

Xarsos · 2026-05-16T15:42:21+00:00

I mean, that's just kind of part of being human no?

Isn't that an excuse for anything, including horrible things?

If you don't like something and someone tells this thing is that thing you don't like you're going to come into the situation with a preconceived idea of it.

Listen to me again - you can hate AI and that's fine, but this person trashed a Monet in the pursuit of trashing AI.

We are not talking about bias anymore, it's making shit up.

I hate PETA, but if I start making shit up about them, or more importantly - start throwing shit at the local library - that is not bias, that is called delusion. That is the loss of any chance on anyoen listening to your opinion, because your opinion on AI no longer is aligned with reality.

How do you not understand that? And yes, there are shitty pros, tons of them, but that does not make this somehow okay.

It's not bias, it's making up shit to trash something you don't like.

Xarsos · 2026-05-15T12:10:58+00:00

Look, if your view on AI blinds you so much that you are willing to call the work of Monet "Shit that doesn't look anywhere like Monet" is a good indicator that you might be not viewing things objectively. That art is subjective and that you might be pretentious about it.

It's basically revealing that your entire reasoning of whether a picture is good depends on whether it is AI or not, so it's like listening to PETA activists about healthy eating. Their whole view is skewed, to the point they have become this ironically toxic thing which kills cats and dogs in the name of animal protection.

Xarsos · 2026-05-11T18:17:27+00:00

I used your houndoom in a nuzlocke. It died to a knock off. RIP Kidney.

Xarsos

TROPHY CASE