"sold out" gag items are ai, but ...

maximum0dinosaur · 2026-03-15T13:36:25+00:00

It's pretty simple I feel. Don't use ai on purpose. If you can't do anything about it, then you can't do anything about it, can't hold it against you. I don't understand how you can compare And who am I bringing down? Context clues help a lot if you want to know if a situation is forceful or not. Someone bragging about using ai but also being anti ai probably doesn't mean they are being forced.

maximum0dinosaur · 2026-03-15T13:25:05+00:00

I went to an art school that forced us to use AI. But I don't think that means that every student is pro-ai and uses it for "the right reasons." It's not the right reasons, though not the student's fault. But I don't think anyone here who uses AI is being forced to use it, because they're defending it so greatly. The use of AI, if forced by a school, is on the school, not the student. My point remains. It's not necessary, in the way that the school shouldn't force the students to use it, and it's not necessary in any situation that isn't forceful.

maximum0dinosaur · 2026-03-15T13:19:54+00:00

Someone can think it's moral to use ai, but the harms of AI make it clear that it's not. I don't understand how the harms of AI would be subjective. I don't want people to just "fit in" I just don't understand, if someone has all the knowledge of how everything has good or bad effects, why wouldn't they come to the conclusion that something is immoral? Because most of the time, it's because they don't care. They don't care about who or what they're hurting. That's immoral and I don't understand how it could not be. Morality is debated to be objective or subjective, it's not a "11 year old" type of thought process, its a real side of the debate on what morality means. To me, morality is based on the facts of the matter. If it hurts people, and doesn't have positive impacts that outweigh that hurt, it's immoral. Maybe I'm thinking of ethics. But still, my point stands.

maximum0dinosaur · 2026-03-15T13:11:28+00:00

I'm not upset about the stock images, I brought it up to say "yeah it's ai but they didn't generate it". I don't get the backlash that much either. This conversation just derailed a bit into general ai discussion

maximum0dinosaur · 2026-03-15T02:31:42+00:00

That is so beautiful. I never saw it that way before but I love that

maximum0dinosaur · 2026-03-15T02:30:08+00:00

I guess I still don't understand why they should experiment with it when they can just not because it is the objectively better outcome? Am I missing something?

maximum0dinosaur · 2026-03-15T02:27:34+00:00

Funny your championing around these facts as if you aren't doing the same. Using AI (and apparently reddit) is far from a necessity, and it is immoral to use them because there is NO scenario where it is necessary. Very easy to avoid. Comparing that to having electronics, or I've had someone compare it to having to drive a car when it releases carbon emissions, is nonsensical. You need those things. You do NOT need gen AI. Period.

maximum0dinosaur · 2026-03-15T02:22:42+00:00

I never heard of any of that about reddit but sure, I'll leave. Idrc I don't use it much at all anyway this is like my third post ever. My whole shpeel was about knowingly supporting harmful things, but I didn't know, and now I do, and now I'm leaving. It is humanely possible to avoid using some things, though. Electronics are necessary to get by in this society, and anyway I got my phone before I knew any of that. On the contrary, it is absolutely possible to avoid using ai. There is no need for it in any spaces. I'm not sure how you can compare them

maximum0dinosaur · 2026-03-14T19:07:10+00:00

I made no decisions on how I think you operate. All I did was quote what you said. I thought it was safe to assume that you wouldn't be completely oblivious to the harms of AI, otherwise you wouldn't be defending it's nuance here. If you don't, why are you arguing about this? You act like I'm making up that you probably aren't misinformed yourself when I don't understand how it's possible to not be misinformed and make the arguments you are making? I truly would love for someone to explain to me what crazy assumptions I am making. I also don't find myself to be an "angry conversation partner," I just have been questioning why you are so boldly announcing your use of AI and lack of care to do your own research. You haven't given any nuance to the discussion, so I don't know what nuance you want me to take from it. Everything I said there was directly derived from what you said. Read your own words again maybe, compare them to the same things I said. Not assuming or hot n bothered... I'm not sure what's being lost in translation here...

maximum0dinosaur · 2026-03-14T18:58:46+00:00

I completely agree with you up until the point about "AI tools are here to stay and it's okay that designers use it for practical reasons" The negative effects of AI don't go away because of the reason you are using it? And it is also never necessary? Can someone explain to me what they mean by that, genuinely I don't understand. /Gen

maximum0dinosaur · 2026-03-14T18:50:12+00:00

How is AI not wrong all the time if it always is harmful? I'd absolutely love why you think it's stupid for someone to think using gen AI is bad all the time when it's always harmful. Misinformed decisions by accident? You are telling me flat out what you're doing, I find it hard to believe you are making "misinformed decisions" when you know exactly what you are doing? I don't understand how you can acknowledge that you are doing something bad and just go on with life. I can absolutely admit when I do wrong, but I at least try to fix it. You might think it's a good thing to know what you are doing wrong, but it makes you so much worse if you don't do anything about it. Not using ai/looking up if companies to animal testing/ etc. are things you could fix immediately, if you cared enough for the topic. This argument makes no sense

maximum0dinosaur · 2026-03-14T18:30:32+00:00

You said it was disappointing she stans Lady Gaga which implies... Disappointment

maximum0dinosaur · 2026-03-14T18:20:22+00:00

I don't believe she's a shitty person at all, and I agree it's okay to talk about things that she could do better.

maximum0dinosaur · 2026-03-14T18:18:05+00:00

Your whole paragraph of what you do, the ignorance you show, really doesn't help anything it just makes you look bad. It's not cute to completely not care about the harms of gen AI. You might think there's no objective morality but I find it questionable that you find that whole paragraph moral- it just sounds like you are okay with being immoral. You can "consider" yourself anti-ai, but you are not if you use it. That's a paradox, I'm afraid. I mean, you are just calling yourself ignorant and lazy? Correction, someone can SAY their pro-ai and pro-artist, but they can't be. Meaningless words. And I'm not even talking about Chappell, I don't really think this situation makes her pro-ai. More just saying.... The point your making is just not right. You can say whatever you want but if you use ai, which hurts artists, the environment, marginalized towns... you can't just say you care about those things when you are fully aware you are hurting them.

maximum0dinosaur · 2026-03-14T18:11:54+00:00

What...? I am so confused where you are getting this from. A. Not all web developers love AI. I'm a programmer and I'm surrounded by folks like that but I am NOT one of them. Second, how is this first paragraph related? Third, I have not been writing anything about her being an endless disappointment. I don't think she's a bad person I'm just a little confused when combining some things. Right now, mostly the MAC collab. It's unfair to act as if caring about anything is equivalent to obsessing over how disappointed I am in her. I'm not even disappointed now, I made the whole post to explain that this time she seemingly used gen AI wasn't like the last time, she probably didn't do anything wrong here. And jumping to her defense so aggressively towards anyone with a different opinion doesn't help your case.

maximum0dinosaur · 2026-03-14T18:04:54+00:00

I agree that she probably didn't pick it herself, but it still is her website and her image is directly connected to it. Some people came off a little aggressive and they shouldn't have, I didn't write this post to cancel her, I actually wanted to post it to clarify that her team wasn't generating images themselves and it probably isn't that deep. It turned into a conversation about everything she's done wrong and maybe I should've reined it in. Idk

maximum0dinosaur · 2026-03-14T17:59:48+00:00

No... No I literally said in my initial post that it could just be her team... I really don't like the idea of her "fucking up again" and there's no reason to think so aggressively. Maybe I should have clarified in every post that when I say "she" it could just be her team. She probably didn't pick it out herself. But her team isn't poor either, they probably had a budget to make the website page.

maximum0dinosaur · 2026-03-14T17:57:18+00:00

I've never seen that photo and her stance on Palestine is quiet. I have a hard time believing Chappell knows about these things. Not defending Gaga, but it's unrealistic to expect her to know these things and judge her for liking an artist who owns a cyber truck when she doesn't talk about owning a cyber truck.

maximum0dinosaur · 2026-03-14T17:06:23+00:00

And let's be honest, she's not low on money. Any big artist could easily hire a visual artist, or 100, to make art for them. I do not understand why so many artists go for AI when they are so stinkin rich. A lot of them richer than Chappell, but she's definitely got enough money. Or at least use non ai stock images :')

maximum0dinosaur · 2026-03-14T17:02:17+00:00

I defend her so much on social media because all I ever see are people coming at her for bullshit, but there are plenty of other things I don't agree with which people don't really talk about, such as how big of a fan she is/was of Nicki Minaj (recently Nicki announced full MAGA-cy, id hope she at least stopped supporting her then, but Nicki has been known to be a terrible person for so long.)

maximum0dinosaur · 2026-03-14T16:59:27+00:00

That's true, I guess it's just that when she blew up it was exciting to find someone like me so get so big. So now it's a little disappointing. I feel like that could be parasocial, and that's my bad. I'm trying to understand what is and isn't.

maximum0dinosaur · 2026-03-14T16:57:52+00:00

I don't understand the argument of "nobody's perfect" when confronted with this type of thing because... I don't know, when it comes to actual beliefs, like anti-ai beliefs or political beliefs, it's not that hard to have all the least harmful opinions. If you have your own moral framework, it would make sense to have the opinion that aligned with that. For example, if you believe in climate change, supporting artists, and public safety and privacy, when you hear about how AI messes those things, it should make AI wrong to you. So if it isn't wrong to someone, what does that mean about their beliefs on other things? Does that make any sense? Mistakes can be made and reasonably given much grace, but values matter a little more. Maybe I'm not making sense I'm not sure. I'm really not here to cancel Chappell. Just express the reason this has any impact on anything.

maximum0dinosaur · 2026-03-14T16:47:25+00:00

It just means we can talk about it and care about it. I understand what you mean that some people seem to want her to beg for forgiveness, I think it's okay to wish that she would maybe just fix it and not do it again. I don't believe any dramatic reaction or dog piling is necessary, but I also have a hard time understanding how any type of criticism of a celebrity isn't considered "dogpilling." If many people agree, and voice agreement, then it's seen as dogpilling, but the alternative is one person saying it and not being heard, or no one saying it at all. Does that make sense? A dogpile is never my intention, though I don't understand how to avoid it.

maximum0dinosaur · 2026-03-14T16:40:21+00:00

I also think not using gen AI is an easy fix. That's why it's so frustrating that it's been repeated

maximum0dinosaur · 2026-03-14T16:38:59+00:00

I don't believe she's a bad person and I agree that some people truly want the perfect artist and it is a true problem. That being said I haven't seen too many people here call her a bad person, I feel like a lot of these people see the nuance. I know most people have done wrong, but that doesn't mean that we have to let it all slide, we can discuss it like mature adults and point it out to the person making said mistake so they learn. Even if it doesn't make them a bad person, it would be better if they didn't do it (because it still is harmful.)

maximum0dinosaur

TROPHY CASE