r/aiwars

Honestly? Pro AI and anti AI are almost useless labels.

I care way more about whether somebody actually gives a shit.

The best anti AI people aren't just screaming into the same algorithm that gives attention to AI. They care about artists, labor, consent, exploitation, ownership, and the very real possibility that another wave of tech ghouls are about to chew up human culture and sell it back to us with a subscription fee.

The best pro AI people aren't just drooling over shiny toys and pretending every concern is fear based caveman panic. They care about access, education, open source, local tools, disability support, new creative workflows, and keeping this technology out of the locked glass towers of billionaires.

Those are the people I respect.

This conversation needs more people with fire and less people with scripts.

AI isn't just an art argument. It's power. It's class. It's labor, law and education. It's who gets access, who gets exploited, who gets erased, who gets paid, and who gets left staring through the window while the future gets auctioned off.

Passion without curiosity turns into religion.

Curiosity without ethics turns into a sales pitch.

Give me the people who are angry for a reason. Give me the people who are excited but not blind. Give me the people who can take a hit, rethink a point, learn something new, and still come back swinging with a better argument.

EDIT: Yes, I used Chat GPT to organize my original text. It doesn't take away from my point. Just say you're too dumb to come up with an original thought and can't believe that people have opinions. Go into Chat GPT and have it make an opinion for you and let me know how it goes.

Thats what Generative AI is designed to do. It doesn't photobash its training data. It doesn't google search images to cut up. It doesnt blend them together.

It studies patterns (ML, MV, has been in use for decades in your local post offices to read your shitty handwriting because it turns out everyone writes a little differently. To automate it, it needs to learn how to identify them) and utilizes multiple layers of pattern recognition to be able to recognize the differences between dogs, cats, cows, humans, red vs blue, cars vs trucks. These models have been in use for a *LONG* time (first YOLOV model released in 2015). Including being fed artist imagery so it can identify "this is a picasso" and "this is a monet". These very same models are also the ones being used by surveillance cameras to identify you on the street.

Your precious art is being fed into these types of models so they can learn patterns and identify them. Nobody cared until someone figured out a way of transforming the data to spit new images back out. Novel images.

That is the "generative" part. Creating new things based on the patterns it has learned. Just. Like. You.

(Yes, on a technical/physical level, these models do not "learn like a human" - we get that)

For this to work, you have to state that AI has no flexibility. That is, essentially shifting the question to how accurately AI can execute arbitrary prompts, which, considering modern top models as gpt image v2 , is an extremely poor bet.

Do you just believe everything every person says? People can be wrong too you know. People can be intentionally manipulative, they might refuse to admit when theyre wrong, they might even just be trolling.

It's never been safe or smart to just accept what we're told without thinking about it for ourselves, testing its basic logic, and challenging it if we think it doesnt hold up. There's no reason to assume pros dont think for themselves too. We're well aware that AI isnt actually intelligent, its just following patterns in language. (Though antis dont seem to wanna admit that AI pattern recognition DOES lead it to answer many questions, correctly enough, pretty often.)

AI is also a lot less stubborn than the average person, more likely to admit when theyre wrong. It's not intentionally manipulative, its not gonna troll people. But even if I think ai is more trustworthy than the average person, that doesnt mean i believe everything it says. I believe things when I see no reason to challenge them, when it seems to make perfects sense, if it doesn't make perfect sense to me, i will challenge it.

No one should just instantly believe everything they're told, pretty much regardless of the source.