Discussion
AI exclusive subreddits or Subreddits that allow AI should be left alone and respected
Same for only traditional or digital art subreddits, if they don't want AI art there then there's a small room for complaining. If a community wants to only engage with AI art then they should be allowed to do that
Here's an example:
So i saw this post, there's this user who is complaining about another user being banned. But said user who was banned was removed because they suggested to ban AI art in a community that allows AI art. The mods have already made it clear in that subreddit that AI is allowed and no fights about AI is allowed there
So this user is now complaining about someone being banned when the rules were already established. If they have any issue then they should've just found a place where no AI is allowed. Other communities should not change themselves for some people, it should be for all
This is an automated reminder from the Mod team. If your post contains images which reveal the personal information of private figures, be sure to censor that information and repost. Private info includes names, recognizable profile pictures, social media usernames and URLs. Failure to do this will result in your post being removed by the Mod team and possible further action.
I'll never understand the folks that deliberately insert themselves into spaces dedicated to something they don't like just so they can behave like belligerent children.
Like, you don't have to like AI, but there's got to be something psychologically wrong with the people that seek out AI friendly spaces so they can bitch and moan about people using AI...
this. the people that do it are gonna be assholes about it either way. theres no reason to follow someone their spaces to cause issues about what they do unless you are deliberately trying to be an asshole
That has nothing to do with AI. Go to any place on the internet and there are low effort posts of someone trying to share an experience or idea that nobody else really cares about. I'd say 99% of what is uploaded to the internet is something that won't get a single like or more than ten views.
If there's no explicit rule against AI, there's nothing wrong with sharing AI art
Your statement presupposes that AI art is automatically a bad thing and should only be in a cordoned off space and not part of the general art community which is nonsense
Places that are explicitly anti-ai---and many formerly neutral spaces are in fact deciding to adopt such rules---should have their rules respected
The claim doesn't depend on misunderstanding the tech, it depends on understanding what a model is worth.
A model is measurably better with let's say artists' work, worse without. That improvement is value extracted from their labor, unpaid. That's why they scraped it instead of skipping it.
'But they still have the original'? So does the guy whose car got borrowed for a taxi servicenothing missing, but the use was taken. Permission to use work has a name and a price, a license. Taking it without paying is theft minus the broken window.
'Stolen labor' isn't ignorance of the training process. It's a precise description: value made by someone's labor, taken without consent, sold for profit.
The people who don't understand AI training are the ones who think value disappears when you compress it into weights.
That's not how it works at all. Just because something makes something else better doesn't mean that it gets some of the value. There's no principle that says that at all.
My argument has nothing to do with the fact that the model does not retain a copy of the training material. My argument has nothing to do with the fact that training on the material merely updates, a series of weighted vectors by my new amounts, whose values are then subsequently updated by other things that it's trained on and so on and so forth
The fact that the material is not meaningfully part of the model but rather taught the model isn't the only or even the main reason why it's not stealing.
Value added by somebody else's labor based on knowledge ledge gained through fair use doesn't constitute stealing of any kind because stealing has a particular meaning and it has nothing to do with whether or not you gain value without permission or paying something.
If a neighbor cuts down a bunch of trees and the resulting lack of shade makes your property more valuable for growing crops, you don't owe them a thing that's just a side effect.
Similarly, if a model is able to learn from something and becomes better at it, that learning is just a side effect of the existence of that thing and the right to observe it.
It's like if a fighter watches tape of a bunch of fights and gets better at fighting, they don't oh the owner of those tapes for any of the value that that fighter requires
If they acquire the tapes illegally without paying for it they can still watch it and anything they learn by watching it that value add to the fighter doesn't create an additional debt. They are only on the hook for the normal penalties for pirating video or whatever.
For example, you can have a recipe book. And you can include somebody else's recipe in a recipe book that they published just last year with a recipe that is never been published before then.
You may be just made to find out that similarly, things like art styles cannot be protected either.
Recipes aren't protected though because of the idea expression dichotomy. You can't protect facts.
And that's the bottom line for the training. The training is fair use. You don't have to pay anybody for fair use.
If I practice drawing from all these different drawings on the web that I see and as an artist I'm able to get better and my drawings are worth more. I don't create a debt to any of those people whose material I practiced on.
So your argument doesn't make any sense at all. There's all sorts of ways to add value to something without incurring a debt. And it doesn't require permission either legally or ethically.
Anything you can do with knowledge gained by analyzing something is fair except for a few very limited carve outs relating to patent laws and musical expression for the most part.
You use condescending language like "try to keep up" while yourself being confidently incorrect and demonstrating some very basic misunderstandings.
Same reason luddites feel the need to flood pro spaces with "AI Slop! REEEE" comments. Because terminally online assholes are going to be terminally online assholes.
Both sides have issues of people doing that. However neutral areas are what the person you’re replying to is talking about. But I’m not trying to start an argument here
Yes, art spaces are by definition neutral. I’m an anti for context, and even if I don’t think what ai is making is “art”, they’re still technically neutral spaces that are not expressly anti or pro
Weird stance but okay.
I don't believe flooding a community with slop or letting them lie about what they post is okay.
An art space should be for the art community and anyone interested not promoters.
The algorithm only presents it. The choice to click on a post and interact with it(which just tells the algorithm to show you more, btw), is entirely on the user.
You're assuming random users are even checking the subreddit being marketed to them. Do you think they're reading the subreddit name, FAQ, rules, etc before posting in it? No, they open the post and interact from there. Maybe they see the title of the subreddit in small text at the top of the post. Or maybe they just read the post and start interacting.
Reddit knows how their users behave and I'd wager it's all an engagement scheme. There is nothing wrong with seeing a post you dislike and disagreeing in the comments. Inevitably some of them are belligerent children, but the net catches a lot of people who just got swept up by Reddit’s engagement design.
You're assuming random users are even checking the subreddit being marketed to them. Do you think they're reading the subreddit name, FAQ, rules, etc before posting in it? No, they open the post and interact from there. Maybe they see the title of the subreddit in small text at the top of the post. Or maybe they just read the post and start interacting.
Still their choice. The fact the average user is a dumbass that just blindly follows the algorithm doesn't magically make it the algorithms fault when they decide to bitch and whine.
Perfect example of what? Do you even know what psychosis actually means? Because noting that AI, unlike God, has tangible evidence of its existence, isn't psychosis.
Good lord the armchair psychologists are out in force...
It’s not personal taste, it’s objectively bad for everyone, staying out of it lets AI bros fester in their echo chambers until suddenly a chunk of the population has AI psychosis and have lost the ability to think for themselves.
Cogsuckers need to be shamed out of their disgusting habit.
It’s not personal taste, it’s objectively bad for everyone, staying out of it lets AI bros fester in their echo chambers until suddenly a chunk of the population has AI psychosis and have lost the ability to think for themselves.
First part is your personal opinion, the rest is armchair psychology bullshit.
Cogsuckers need to be shamed out of their disgusting habit.
I'm not even going to dignify that with a response... Grow up and get over yourself.
Yea. Ai subreddits same as anti ai subs should be left alone by the other side. Brigadding and basically bullying should be looked down upon withing these places though by both sides.
Yeah, the pro-AI side just wants to build loud, disruptive, expensive, RAM/compute/storage monopolizing, electricity-price-increasing, datacenters everywhere there's space in order to... Make number go up a little faster, at best? At worst it's about enabling mass surveillance, mass propaganda, erosion of trust in everything and everyone.
Whereas the anti-AI side just wants to be left alone to exist without these region-ruining abominations going up in their countries/neighborhoods.
Like, this is very much not a "Both sides are wrong to be enraged and mock the other side." -issue. The pro-AI side has actual tangible harms associated with it.
What is the ABSOLUTE WORST CASE scenario, if AI is actually left to cook until it's actually undeniably useful enough to warrant the expenditure BEFORE being deployed en-masse? Some game decomps are delayed? We don't get a buggy version of photoshop that AI reimplemented?
(both good things, to be clear, as in, if you aren't selling it, you don't get to stop people from enjoying it in the case of the abandonware/older games. Piracy is the single solitary reason a LOT of games are still able to be enjoyed today. And just because you've made software, doesn't mean you get to charge exorbitant amounts for it every month until the heat death and then charge more when your victim tries to cancel it, in the case of the adobe suite.)
The absolute worst case scenario for actually developing AI until it's actually DONE is that GooZonBook bleed a little of their absolutely obscene wealth for a while. Something the world wouldn't even notice. That's about it. This current generation of genAI is NOT going to make any significant breakthroughs in anything. The fact that nobody can trust anything online and the aforementioned economic impacts, the harm to the users of the genAI systems, they are NOT commensurate with the meagre benefits genAI brings us today.
That's what radicalizes me against genAI. The imbalance in utility and societal cost. The harm it does to its users. In short it's a personification of pathological greed.
The problem with local models IS data centers. How exactly is a regular mortal supposed to afford to put several THOUSAND dollars towards a GPU that can maybe run a piddly model that can in no sense of the words hold a candle to the state of the art models?
Let’s see what you think of it when AI cures cancer and aging.
The world is cooked without AI as it is. Global warming, alarmingly declining birth rates in the western world, an economic model that is unsustainable, the rise of populism/fascism, enormous wealth disparity and increasing social unrest.
The only real solution for all of these issues is to leave the stewardship of the human race to entities far more capable than ourselves.
That’s just my take anyway, I appreciate where you’re coming from.
When AI cures cancer and aging, it will have advanced FAR beyond where it stands now and I will hail it as a grand accomplishment.
However, it will almost certainly have NOTHING in common with our current genAI systems. At which point, yes please, but right now the technology just doesn't offer out anywhere close to how much it takes in.
I mean, we will need an entirely different paradigm than the current genAI systems can offer, and that while both current genAI systems and the hypothetical AGI can be placed under the same broad umbrella of "machine learning", it will not be an iterated solution off of LLMs.
Kind of like how no matter how much you iterate on mechanical calculators, those will never lead to someone playing Crysis on their home computer, that always required advances in entirely different branches of technology.
Some of the things learned while iterating hard on mechanical calculators would surely be useful... But there is no reason that building Babbage's Analytical Engine would be a pre-requisite for modern computing.
Honestly, I’m surprised that the current capabilities have emerged from what essentially started as language models.
How do language models become capable of solving millenium prize problems?
Turns out language is just a way of decoding meaning, and maths is a kind of language.
Feed them all of the science, data, audio, video we can and suddenly everything becomes language.
They suddenly become capable of intuiting actual physics because being able to predict what moves in the next frame gives you an inherent understanding of motion and gravity.
I won’t be shocked now if the current architecture a few generations down the line combined with persistent memory leads to a kind of intelligence we can only begin to understand.
yeah it's funny, the anti sub was gonna get shut down because people there bragged about getting banned so much, they had to make it a rule they couldn't brag about it anymore lol
A not too insignificant amount of the ones failing to do so are new accounts. Which leads me to believe they're (the ones with newer accounts) people who were banned making alts trying to get the sub banned, bots made with the same intent, or idiots who don't read the rules. The rest don't read the rules or don't care as well, I'm just pointing out the newer accounts.
There was a post the other day, I don't know if it's still up or if the mods finally got off their asses, but it was straight up doxxing someone and had been up for nearly a day at the time I came across it. It's not just the users, the mods over there are at best apathetic and at worst complicit in this behavior...
Debate is encouraged, but the fact that our rules are designed to allow for the closest thing to free speech on the topic of AI that Reddit enables, it leans more toward the free speech side of things. We don't remove posts that other more serious debate subs would tend to remove. It's not a total free-for-all, but debate is not necessarily required either. Just being on-topic about the subject of generative AI.
Nah they're right. It's a free speech sub first and foremost, with the intention to foment debate, but debating is not necessary. You can if you want to, but you don't have to type of thing.
A lot of both pro and anti subs are echo chambers with zero chill. That's exactly why I prefer to leave them alone. Not gonna respect this kind of places tho
There's definitely some similarity, but I would like to make one distinction. Once you look past some of the memes and into the discussion, there's a lot more malice on the anti side. Anti's attack pros just for liking AI. Pros hate anti's for attacking them.
Look at it this way- which side wants peace more? If all the hostility was gone and each side could just go about their day, pros would be completely fine with that. But there's no chance that the anti side would agree to that.
I mean... I got jumped on by a rando and told to kms in a subreddit for a game recently for pointing out how it's weird that the subreddit says one thing about AI and their discord says another. This was in the Discord associated with the game. The other person had gone on a rant about how AI is the future, etc etc.
Like, I wasn't even saying AI was good/bad. Just how the two portions not being in agreement was weird.
And there's always going to be some idiot on any side of an argument.
I'm going off a more generalized experience from being on both pro and anti subs for a while. The overall feel of pro spaces may involve poking fun, but as a response to the negative behaviors from anti posts that get a ton of support from other anti's.
True enough (as far as there will always be idiots on any side of an argument)
Given the idea of Pro v. Anti in any discussion, however, there is always going to be one side that is on what can be considered the "attack" while the other pokes fun. We can actually observe this in the modern day in a lot of things (avoiding listing them only to avoid accidentally derailing).
Though, in the case of, and returning back to, the discussion of AI... In my experience, I've had plenty of instances where I either see someone, or am the someone, outside these few specific subreddits getting yelled at for not using AI or not wanting to. It's just not as heavily publicized, for lack of a better term. Antis, in this argument, have a lot more targets they can look at (IE: Datacenters and politicians), and thus there's more capacity to see the extremes in these discussions. Maps of Datacenters, Politicians pushing accelerationism or benefiting from AI companies, people funding or making AI, etc, provide visible focal points for the extremists to look at. Pros just don't't really have the same AMOUNT of people to point at. There are Anti-AI politicians and lobbyists, but that doesn't generate the same focus, for lack of a better term. The biggest I can think of is a politician claiming that people who are against AI are terrorists or enemies, or a politician demanding people use a really stupid term or be deemed the enemy... And both sides clown on the latter, but not the former.
Respect what? Their fear of actual discussion and alternative opinions? If they don’t care about showing respect to other sides, they won’t get any from me. "Defending AI" sub is a good example - banning debates with a name like that is just pathetic. And I'm not even anti.
What's even more funny to me, is that the idiot making the complaint claimed it is anti-free speech... when they were banned because they wanted to remove others free speech.
Because often, a niche subreddit is chugging along with relatively few issues, and then out of nowhere someone shows up and raises a stink about AI, and it gets brigaded by others with the same agenda, fair mods might try to do a poll and then naturally the poll gets filled up by those who barely use the sub but want to see AI gone, and suddenly there's a new rule against AI in the sub.
If it's a small enough topic or niche enough sub, it's unlikely that you'd be able to "just make your own" new sub that's friendly for AI. Nobody would ever find it or visit your second sub just for what AI brings to the table. Like, imagine a random older game with a small cult following, like...I don't know, Lionhead's Black and White or something.
If the topic of AI can suddenly be raised and a rule added to ban it, then the reverse must also be true; you should be able to bring it up and ask the sub to reverse their decision or at least reconsider the issue. There shouldn't be a "one way street" here that always leads to banning AI.
In other words, if a sub has no rules against AI, then in accordance with OP's vision of respect, no one should suddenly ask for it to be banned, right?
Right, so, according to your logic, if a new type of addictive and harmful drug is discovered, but there are no laws about banning it, it shouldn't be banned?
That's not relevant to the discussion at hand. We're talking about subs banning AI. That means a blanket ban on anything AI generated. Posts on subs aren't automated. An image might be generated, but the poster is human. So if anything bad is posted, it's the humans fault.
Again, not relevant to reddit. The problem you're referring to has more to do with chat bot regulation and restrictions on access by minors. That has nothing to do with harmless AI images being submitted as posts to subreddits.
It's like suggesting we ban aspirin from stores because fentanyl is causing deaths.
I didn't avoid anything. You just want me to say all AI is bad. There are problems in certain applications, but not in others. And a blanket ban from reddit is unwarranted.
I don't? I literally want you to answer the question. Did you, or did you not, say that drugs are worse than AI because they kill people? I'm not asking you anything about bans right now.
Well, in some places personal use is actually allowed. It's distribution and popularization that is prohibited, mostly. If you ask me, OP's idea falls more under the latter, because personal use would be quietly using AI without telling anyone or publishing results
That's not my logic, we're talking about OP's logic. OP says subreddits that allow or disallow AI should be allowed to maintain that stance without being bothered by "pros" or "antis" trying to change it.
The thing is, nobody can force anyone online to change their stance on something. If a subreddit or any online community adopts a certain stance on whatever topic, it's either 1) because this stance alligns with the ideals of the community leaders, or 2) the community doesn't want to lose users (often because they could lose the majority, if they do not adopt that stance).
Ok. So then OP is wrong, and since nobody can force anyone to adopt a certain stance, then there's nothing wrong with simply asking a sub to add or change a rule at any time, whether to ban AI or allow it.
Didnt say I hate them. Just that both sides spill hate towards the other all the time. None of them are actually chill. Just going at eachothers throats 24/7 amd then they complain about the other again
In an effort to discourage brigading, we do not allow linking to other subreddits or users. We kindly ask that you screenshot the content that you wish to share, while being sure to censor private information, and then repost.
Private information includes names, recognizable profile pictures, social media usernames, other subreddits, and URLs. Failure to do this will result in your post being removed by the Mod team and possible further action.
But the first two frames are how it usually goes. As long as we keep to that, there's absolutely no drama. Normal people just keep to their own businesses, whether pro or anti.
This sub is teeming with AI loving rats like yourself, everything here is one sided, including polls.
Basic knowledge of literacy shows that in a situation where there’s a “headline” (title in this case) that you fill that with the information you want to hit the hardest, then context and afterthoughts come later.
As an anti, I agree. I frickin' hate AI, but I ain't gonna bash it in places like promptpunks, defendingAIart, or AIcomics, because those are places meant for it.
I also don't go on things like conservative youth or teenagers because those are also not for me.
Honestly, I like reddit because I can just mute the subreddits I hate.
It’s an AI support subreddit, most likely those are just bots trying to farm attention or derail conversation for shits and giggles, just like most trolls online are just baiting for clicks. Best thing you can do is just don’t engage.
I figure you’d find more people using automated tools like farming bots in a place where people are more regularly using automated tools and assistance on things they can’t, or won’t do.
As an anti, I agree with this. In fact, I think it's totally fair to also make it against the rules to hate on an AI-generated post if it's explicitly allowed on that subreddit. A Subreddit has every right to ban AI content if they don't want it, but that means the reverse is true too.
funny enough the biggest argument i get when i tell ai bros to keep to their own spaces is that we all follow them to harass them. which A: not all, and B: wouldnt more people be harassing you if you post in a place occupied primarily by people that dont welcome you?
Idk, pro-AI users seems like the most sad pathetic people I luckily only met online.
And not talking about the average joe using AI to create “art” for his own interests or playing a TTPRPG or something.
But the people that genuinely think they are creating art when asking a computer to create it for them.
All that being said, I’ve never inserted myself in a subreddit that I’m not a part of just to hate on what they are doing. I do however think most pro-AI people genuinely are incapable of overseeing all the problems it is creating and will create in the future. Just because they feel special for creating an image, and if an artist rightfully critiqued it they lash out and act like the victim.
Every interaction with a pro-AI person just makes me even more anti.
And every interaction with people like you makes me more annoyed by antis. Fucking virtue signaling to the degree you guys just raid pros subreddits or review pages and try to bully them into not making ai art. Not saying you do it but I see this behavior quite often these days and it's filthy behavior. Trying to bully people out of doing something they are enjoying is pathetic.
Reminds me of liberals who bully people online for not doing/saying things the 'right' way and then get surprised that so many people are turning right. I lean liberal myself and really, liberals are their own worst enemy at this point.
Nonetheless, I'm a creative and don't even use AI much in my work. If I do, it's just in the planning/brainstorming stage. But I don't mind regular people being able to generate whatever they have in their imagination. Sometimes they cross pollinate ideas that have never been blended before and actually come up with something novel.
At the end of the idea, I like seeing what people imagine. A lot of people are having fun generating what's on their mind and could never realize before. And many artists use it to fill in gaps in their capabilities (ex: they draw beautifully but don't how to use blender, and use ai to turn their 2d art into 3d). I've seen artists using AI create some really cool stuff in the past 2 years.
You have most certainly saw something cool that you liked, and had no idea was ai assisted in the past 2 years. Artists can easily hide any ai artifacts/tells to the point you just won't notice. They won't mention they used AI in the process cause you antis are fanatical.
And these tools are only getting better to the point, all of the antis woes will literally go unheard. And in 5 years from now, you guys will give up on whining about it. You're wasting energy.
And shit, I must imagine most of the antis aren't even creative. The kinds of possibilities open to all people with any degree of imagination right now are almost endless. Even when these tools were far more limited a few years ago, there was so much you can do with them. A part of creativity is working with limitations.
Alright getting mad at liberals in an unrelated discourse just shows what I’m dealing with here. You’re being upset I’m calling out AI “art creators” because none of my other critiques are anywhere close to bullying people for not doing the right thing lmao.
AI isn’t creative. It works based on the creativity of others. That’s it limitation.
The art created is just a bunch of stolen content. Which is fine to use individually, but wrong to sell as art.
I'm a lib myself. And yes, I get really annoyed by liberals because our over the top purity tests and online bullying just drives people to vote for dipshits like Trump. And it also annoys me that many of us can't see that there is an opportunity to actually implement a more marxist kind of economy with AI automation.
Obviously not with these tech overlords in charge but there is a window of opportunity if we play our cards right. But instead, majority of us have such a strong cognitive dissonance, that just the word AI triggers a repulsive response. Like let's look at the bigger picture here. This shit isn't going away and we can start working towards a potentially post scarcity economy that works for the benefit of us all.
AI is a tool. Photoshop is not creative. A brush is not creative. Paint is not creative. Those are also tools. The mind behind those tools is what makes creativity possible. It all starts with a thought and then the work that goes into manifesting that thought. People are using AI to manifest what they had in their imagination through describing their thoughts.
Soon, you will be able to actually just generate what you are imagining, by just thinking it. We already have seen this is possible with people generating speech with mere thought.
As for working off the creativity of others. We all fucking do that. Every artist works off of the art of others and blended their own thoughts/experiences into it to create something new.
AI contains the culmination of everything ever created by humans, and allows people to generate any combination of things they imagine. It is an imagination generator pretty much.
In the hands of artists, it gives them so much more power and capability. That is why I'm not too worried about the future. Artists will thrive and I can already see this, considering the main AI art/videos that go viral were made by artists. And in all that work, nobody can deny it has soul. It still does. It's when you just prompt 'create a masterpiece for me,' that you'll get generic slop.
if you believe the “sToLen cOnTenT” line it’s pretty fucked up to think it’s ok for personal use. If I steal your car, it’s ok as long as I don’t resell it? AI doesn’t steal anything so it’s fine to use under whatever circumstances, but if you think it’s stealing why is it ok for personal use? Almost as though you don’t really believe it’s stealing anything…
And not talking about the average joe using AI to create “art” for his own interests or playing a TTPRPG or something.
Thing is, this is most of us. In fact, I'd say that describes me very well, as I have done some basic image generation that I never posted anywhere and I love the OOC app (AI powered storytelling where you're the main character, basically). But yet, outside of more pro-tolerant spaces, I get blasted with insults and attacks for enjoying any level of AI because there's zero nuance or distinction. And I'm certain there's a good number of other users who feel the same way.
And I'm not saying there aren't bad pros out there. Of course there are. But like, be careful that you're not attributing their sins upon the rest of us. It's very much like how certain groups will highlight a violent criminal who happened to be an immigrant and use that to paint all immigrants as violent criminals. It's just wrong.
I think the main thing that earns it a bit of disrespect is that it's presented as defending AI. Obviously there's locally run models, but the majority of the AI images I see getting posted were clearly made with the corporate run shit. It's pretty clear that the AI being "defended" in this case largely includes the corporate bullshit, and that just leaves a bad taste in my mouth. A bunch of people who are probably in the same mess as the rest of us gathering together to defend the investments of a bunch of corporate shitlords who are actively doing everything to not only make our lives worse, but, ironically, to kill any potential AI had to actually benefit us as a society.
Every point I see being made is just defending the actions of the AI corpos. Multi-billionaires who do not need your defense nor care about you or anything you have to say. They're not going to give you a place as a butler in one of their mansions because you said nice things about them on reddit.
If any of these people really gave a shit about AI, I'd see more posts against the corporate shit that is twisting and corrupting what this tech could have been, and supporting the technology being developed the way it should have been. But none of them even so much as mention that. It's all just "I wanna make slop posts with chatGPT and spread them around the internet and not have anyone tell me it's dogshit, I love my corpo overlords, and I can't wait for the next stage of hyper-consumerism!!!".
Like the cera (I think?) Scraping. Pro ais went to an anti ai space and stole stuff
One, that's not brigading, and two, Cara literally presented itself as a scrape-proof site. What that one guy did was a dick move, yes, but you can't present yourself as "un-scrapable" and not expect someone was going to test that theory...
Ah yes, because anti ai, a sub called anti ai and is intended specifically for people to voice their discontent about ai is asking for how much you you worship ai. No? Didn't think so.
Stop pretending like ai bros are above what they preach, and stop acting like a victim. People not liking their ai slop does not make them victims
Let me wrap your title around: Anti ai exclusive subs or subreddits that don't allow ai should be left alone and respected
It has to do with the title as well as the image, which is the first thing you present. You could have made the title "pro ai and anti subs should stop harassing each other in circles specifically meant for one audience", but no, the title and image is 100% in favour of one side.
Adding a small tidbit below the post to avoid critisism is disingenuous at best and manipulative at worst
If you're going to design it as favoritism, expect critisism against it
If you make your argument before reading the post then you're bloating up the discourse
Adding a small tidbit below the post to avoid critisism is disingenuous at best and manipulative at worst
It's literally the first line of the body text, if you didn't read that much then idk what to say man. I'd expect someone who is here to actually have a discussion to read the post before making their point
I understand what you are talking about, and I agree in general (it's the same for places where AI is not tolerated).
However, you're fooling no one here: your "example" is the reason why you post this. Yes, their complains are inappropriate, but they received enough backlash from all of this, so there is no need to put another nail on the coffin.
AHAHAHA- Wait, you are seriously defending yourself like that?
You are sending a post describing the exact situation of another post, then mention it as an example, and expect people to believe that it's not targeted at this person only despite the lack of other examples... You really think people will buy it?
Stop being hypocritical here, you are basically harassing someone who already got a reality check.
•
u/AutoModerator 13h ago
This is an automated reminder from the Mod team. If your post contains images which reveal the personal information of private figures, be sure to censor that information and repost. Private info includes names, recognizable profile pictures, social media usernames and URLs. Failure to do this will result in your post being removed by the Mod team and possible further action.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.