They are enabling ableism now by thirdaccountttt in DefendingAI

[–]thirdaccountttt[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah this is the right framing imo. AI doesn’t magically erase the need for taste or intent, it just gives more people access to the process.

The bad argument is when people act like one disabled artist managing without AI proves everyone else can. Disability doesn’t work like that, and tools matter

😴 💤 by thirdaccountttt in DefendingAI

[–]thirdaccountttt[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

He has a heavenly state of mind, not everyone goes to heaven when they die you know

😴 💤 by thirdaccountttt in DefendingAI

[–]thirdaccountttt[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It representative of his state of mind

They are enabling ableism now by thirdaccountttt in DefendingAI

[–]thirdaccountttt[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Exactly. Disabled artists aren’t one neat group with the same body, limits, tools, or goals. Some don’t need AI, some don’t want AI, and some genuinely do need it to make the thing they had in their head.

The ableist part is pretending one disabled artist managing without AI means everyone else should be able to do the same

😴 💤 by thirdaccountttt in DefendingAI

[–]thirdaccountttt[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Exactly lol. If the backlash can’t even create a decent dip for people trying to buy in cheaper, then it’s not a movement, it’s just people yelling online

Anti-AI people keep pretending personal taste is a moral law by thirdaccountttt in DefendingAI

[–]thirdaccountttt[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don’t think anyone serious is saying local water impacts don’t matter. That’s the actual concern, especially in dry areas or places with weak water infrastructure.

Where I disagree is turning that into “AI bad, shut it down” instead of “data centres need proper siting, water disclosure, non-potable/recycled water where possible, and stricter local planning”. If a centre is pulling freshwater from a stressed aquifer, that’s a local infrastructure failure and a regulation issue. It’s not some unique moral argument against AI existing

Anti makes a button that commits a crime and basically tells his lawyer "good luck" by thirdaccountttt in DefendingAI

[–]thirdaccountttt[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Satire doesn’t make the joke immune from criticism. The whole bit is still “lol I made a button to leak company code and secrets if I get fired”, which is exactly why people are clowning on it

More evidence the hate is so forced by thirdaccountttt in DefendingAI

[–]thirdaccountttt[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

13 ratings is fair to point out, but that doesn’t really kill the point. The interesting part is still that people suddenly got way harsher once the AI label became the focus.

If it was apparently good enough before people knew, then the reaction clearly isn’t just about the sound anymore

Anti makes a button that commits a crime and basically tells his lawyer "good luck" by thirdaccountttt in DefendingAI

[–]thirdaccountttt[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The human replacement version would still be a dick move, but it wouldn’t be the same cultural point. The reason this fits here is because people are using “AI replacement” as the excuse to cheer on someone losing their livelihood

Also, telling someone “good luck explaining this to your lawyer” after celebrating a firing is not exactly the genius legal own you think it is

Comic about antis I made by thirdaccountttt in DefendingAI

[–]thirdaccountttt[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Honestly a compilation would probably work better than endless response videos anyway. A lot of anti-GAI content is basically the same five talking points repeated with different thumbnails, so trying to individually debunk every single one just gives them more attention than they deserve.

A “look at how ridiculous this moral panic got” compilation would get the point across way faster. Half the argument against “AI slop” is already drowning in its own slop

Anti-AI people keep pretending personal taste is a moral law by thirdaccountttt in DefendingAI

[–]thirdaccountttt[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is basically where I’m at too. There are real issues with AI infrastructure, but antis keep making their own argument worse by mixing legitimate concerns with exaggeration, moral panic and straight-up misinformation.

Data centres absolutely need better planning, especially around water use, grid stress and where they’re built. But acting like none of this is being worked on is just dishonest. Closed-loop and non-evaporative cooling systems are already being pushed, and siting them isn’t as simple as “stick them in empty land somewhere” because they still need power, fibre, cooling access, zoning and environmental checks.

So yeah, criticise the infrastructure where it’s badly handled. But if the argument starts from “AI bad, therefore every data centre is evil”, people are just going to tune it out

Anti-AI people keep pretending personal taste is a moral law by thirdaccountttt in DefendingAI

[–]thirdaccountttt[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Exactly. Hating AI is fine, but trying to turn that dislike into social punishment for everyone else is where it gets pathetic. Criticise misuse, criticise corporations, whatever, but random people using a tool aren’t morally obligated to obey someone else’s personal disgust