AI Derangement Syndrome / Anti-AI artists / Pro-AI technocultists / AI "debate" communities - The Natural Retardation in the Artificial Intelligence communities

[Do Not Touch Me Pls]

This whole "stop AI being able to make nudes" shit has been pissing me off honestly, and believe it or not I don't even use AI to make porn whatsoever. No, not even of Judy. Honestly.

It's just like. How are these people going to feel when they realise men have been turning women naked just by looking at them, with the power of their minds alone, for millennia?

Notice how the Big Tech are shoving AI onto our throats 24/7 whether we like it or not to turn all of us into low-energy husks, but somehow when people use AI to create porn (which is the only real purpose for AI since it's one of the only things that it's actually good for) they and the payment processors go berserk.

The hypocrisy is unreal.

 

[Slurred]

I want to know what college needs an LLM subscription for a creative writing course, not even a computer science one.

Pressing X to doubt on this one. Some very shitty diploma mill maybe? The world is a large and strange place, I suppose. There's plenty of talk about this kind of thing, "they're FORCING us to use AI," but I haven't seen compelling evidence for it actually happening. Though if anyone has any it would be good content for this thread.

Reddit reacts to Grok restricting porn creation in a calm and reasonable manner.

Such a stupid own goal for Elon to even allow this in the first place. It's great that Grok isn't ideologically censored to the same extent as other big models, but allowing and even explicitly advertising its ability to make "spicy content" was just a huge risk with no upside that inevitably blew up in a predictable way and left everyone mad. I doubt most of these redditors were even paying for a bluecheck.

I've been making art on the side by posing 3D models and tracing over them. Don't look that good, but it functions. I use Gemini to make poses look less stiff and fix facial expressions (I'm not rigger, so some of the models don't even have a facial rig, especially if I'm kit bashing them), and for the most part it's pretty good for it.

Tried it with ChatGPT first, but it would always weirdly crop and resize the image it was editing. The only real problem I've come across with Gemini is, of course, the guidelines that stop the AI from interacting with anything visibly violent or sexual. In this instance, apparently a close up on a character's leg during a low shot on a body was too damn sexy for Gemini and broke it so hard the chat started yelling cake recipes at me.

You should try out some local models if you have the hardware for it. Capabilities such as img2img at different levels of denoise, controlnet, and inpainting allow you to have a lot more control over how much and in what ways the final image deviates from the base. You can also specify the exact size of the output, though the height and width must be multiples of 8.

Nevermind that the giant datacenter model of AI is doomed because the most popular use cases (anime waifus and funny racist music) are done better by local models than a corporate ToS.

Funny racist music you say? I would love a local Suno alternative, but I'm not up on the open music model scene. Anything you can recommend?

 

[Trollistic]

@Grok add Israeli flags

 

[Helping Friendly Book]

it is made by trannies that create pages on Neocities

Yeah, you have lost me there. Fuck Neocities.

 

[LopsidedLegend]

This whole "stop AI being able to make nudes" shit has been pissing me off honestly, and believe it or not I don't even use AI to make porn whatsoever. No, not even of Judy. Honestly.

It's just like. How are these people going to feel when they realise men have been turning women naked just by looking at them, with the power of their minds alone, for millennia?

While true. The problem is actualization of unsolicited pornography without the person being depicted's consent. Just like how atrioc got in trouble for the same thing years ago and how destiny got in trouble for it without even using ai. You cannot produce porn of someone who has yet to give you consent. That's non negotiable. If it was e-thots complaining people are getting free feet pics it would be one thing. But people targeted people's kids. It's fucking gross.

That being said. That's an issue on Elon allowing his ai to edit all photos uncensored and thinking the 400 million jeet bots he pretends are human would be able to handle themselves. The technology itself isn't an issue. It's the people using it for nefarious purposes. Ones that Destiny has a thread proving isn't just for newer technology either and people have been doing this for thousands of years. It's modern day peeping Tom's effectively. Gross, but the fact Tom is using the bathroom wall to perv on women while unseen doesn't make walls bad. Nor are holes for paintings bad just because he peers through them either. Tom is the bad person. Not the wall. Same here. It's the jeets, not ai.

 

[Aero the Alcoholic Bat]

This whole "stop AI being able to make nudes" shit has been pissing me off honestly, and believe it or not I don't even use AI to make porn whatsoever. No, not even of Judy. Honestly.

It's just like. How are these people going to feel when they realise men have been turning women naked just by looking at them, with the power of their minds alone, for millennia?

There's a huge difference between using technology to produce artificial nudes of someone (ESPECIALLY if you distribute those images publicly), and simply being perverted and using your imagination (and that is bad enough)

Unclothing a photo of someone who didn't consent to it is fucking gross.

 

[LopsidedLegend]

Notice how the Big Tech are shoving AI onto our throats 24/7 whether we like it or not to turn all of us into low-energy husks, but somehow when people use AI to create porn (which is the only real purpose for AI since it's one of the only things that it's actually good for) they and the payment processors go berserk.

The hypocrisy is unreal.

Creating unlimited free furry/waifu foot porn while avoiding paying some troon artist 100 dollars to refuse to work vs undressing a child or random fat lady on the internet... I shouldn't have to point out the difference between civit models and Elon's controversy. But I will. Real people are actually real. Porn is inherently objectifying of whoever is involved. Objectifying someone without consent is immoral. Hell, objectifying even with consent is a grey area. Little girls getting sexualized is already bad enough, when its "uh achtually a 9001 year old vampire and a drawing", never mind when it's an actual child.

"But people got away with it." So? Destiny so far has gotten away with it too, doesn't make it right, it means he should be in prison yet sadly isn't atm.

 

[Nick Wilde]

While true. The problem is actualization of unsolicited pornography without the person being depicted's consent. Just like how atrioc got in trouble for the same thing years ago and how destiny got in trouble for it without even using ai. You cannot produce porn of someone who has yet to give you consent. That's non negotiable. If it was e-thots complaining people are getting free feet pics it would be one thing. But people targeted people's kids. It's fucking gross.

Philosophical question, and I know which side you will likely fall on, but is AI generated porn of a person actually comparable to actual, real, genuine porn of that person? That's why I make the comparison to dudes imagining a chick naked in their head.

People can use it for questionable intentions, that's very true. I can understand that as a kind of malicious usage, generating fakes of a real person could have real negative consequences, and I think we can all understand the wider problems with that. But more generally, if every god forsaken flavour of guro incest pedo hentai has been technically fine since forever, on the basis that a drawing is not real, I don't really see a meaningful distinction. AI porn isn't real. It's pretty much the same thing as a drawing. It can be made without compromising any real person's decency, in which case it's not exploiting anyone; in fact arguably that makes it morally and ethically superior to any other form of porn.

Which is why I think @Do Not Touch Me Pls makes a valid point. You gotta think, who's losing out, and why would they prefer to blanket ban something than merely police its use. Very much a baby/bathwater thing here.

 

[LopsidedLegend]

Philosophical question, and I know which side you will likely fall on, but is AI generated porn of a person actually comparable to actual, real, genuine porn of that person? That's why I make the comparison to dudes imagining a chick naked in their head.

People can use it for questionable intentions, that's very true. I can understand that as a kind of malicious usage, generating fakes of a real person could have real negative consequences, and I think we can all understand the wider problems with that. But more generally, if every god forsaken flavour of guro incest pedo hentai has been technically fine since forever, on the basis that a drawing is not real, I don't really see a meaningful distinction. AI porn isn't real. It's pretty much the same thing as a drawing. It can be made without compromising any real person's decency, in which case it's not exploiting anyone; in fact arguably that makes it morally and ethically superior to any other form of porn.

Which is why I think @Do Not Touch Me Pls makes a valid point. You gotta think, who's losing out, and why would they prefer to blanket ban something than merely police its use. Very much a baby/bathwater thing here.

I'd say it is due to it being indistinguishable for the general population and a random teacher posting photos on Twitter could get randomly fired for someone nudifying a picture of her teaching her class. The thoughts in your head can't do that because there's no actualization of them yet. Similar to how you can copyright a song you make but not the song you thought of in your head.

AI porn's issue is the realism, and because realistic depictions can lead to realistic consequences. Also, all porn is immoral, but reality makes the moral quandaries become safety quandaries. The issue with ai indistinguishable from photos to the average person is not an ethical concern, but a safety concern.

Obviously however, you are correct. KARENS are gonna KAREN. They want all porn banned because they have dry vaginas and nobody to comfort them but their whine bottles and the voices in their heads. KARENS can go fuck themselves even when they are correct. Because they are correct here. But as you stated are taking things too far.

 

[femboy fart huffer]

boss

her

There's your problem.

 

[AnOminous]

This whole "stop AI being able to make nudes" shit has been pissing me off honestly, and believe it or not I don't even use AI to make porn whatsoever. No, not even of Judy. Honestly.

Suspiciously specific denial.

 

[Zeftax]

I fucking hate AI to my core, never expected to post in this thread. But lately it seems that under EVERYTHING I watch on youtube (mostly music mixes) there is at least one comment saying something along the lines of "With so much AI slop filling youtube, I am so glad to have found some real content to watch!", it feels like the new "who listening in 2018?", who fucking cares? What other content would you watch? I refuse to believe those "5 cats playing smooth jazz in an alley 3 hours" videos really do get any honest viewers. Also I hate the word "slop" being synonymous with "ai generated" and so damn overused.

 

[Big Fish]

There's this YouTube channel that has popped up several times in my recommendations called "Perfect Scarecrow" that uploads these surreal animations:

Most comments tend to be either positive ones or dumb memes. What caught my eye, however, is whining over le hecking evil sloperino that I noticed in comment sections of some of Scarecrow's videos:

Spoiler: Seething galore

Sorry for mobilefagging here, I'll grab better screenshots when I get on my PC.

I haven't seen the creator confirm whether it's AI or not, however if it was the former I would not call it "slop" because it certainly is more original than Facebook AI grandma bait or mass-produced garbage you see on Shorts. I also bet the people salty about supposed AI use are those insufferable TikTok/Xitter/Jewsky kid types that hate AI either because someone more famous told them to, or because of that "AI literally kills artists!!1" narration.

Spoiler: Art sperg

As an artfag myself I sometimes tend to use AI image generators for character design and pose inspirations when brainstorming these myself or photo references won't do it, and also just for shits and giggles because why not. I can safely say that if prompted well enough, AI can create some really cool monster designs.

 

[Inco G. Nito]

AI or not

Looks like AI to me. Doesn't account for the man hours spent vetting the results, altering the results, doing the sound design, etc. Bottom line; if you're not able to replicate this kind of end product 'just typing a few words in a prompt yo', then it's not slop. If the argument is that it's hypothetically easy to replicate using the software then I'd argue back that it's so abstract that nobody else could really make it either. Labor = value kills everything it touches, art included. A poorly executed good idea is still better than a perfectly executed shitty one.

 

[long waters]

Objectifying someone without consent is immoral. Hell, objectifying even with consent is a grey area.

I don't think I agree with this on its own. I think objectifying people in general is fine, isn't stuff like memes or political satire and such a form of objectifying people? They certainly don't offer consent to that.

There's a huge difference between using technology to produce artificial nudes of someone (ESPECIALLY if you distribute those images publicly), and simply being perverted and using your imagination (and that is bad enough)

I think this is the key issue here. Distributing those images publicly. You can imagine anything you want in your head, but when you start spreading it to others it can be like a form of slander.
Also the issue of children. Obviously sexualizing children is wrong, but it's not because you're objectifying them, in that case the issue is the sexual part.

Philosophical question, and I know which side you will likely fall on, but is AI generated porn of a person actually comparable to actual, real, genuine porn of that person?

I would say it's definitely not but...

I'd say it is due to it being indistinguishable for the general population and a random teacher posting photos on Twitter could get randomly fired for someone nudifying a picture of her teaching her class. The thoughts in your head can't do that because there's no actualization of them yet. Similar to how you can copyright a song you make but not the song you thought of in your head.

... but I agree that this is where it starts to become a problem. If you are generating AI porn of a particular person and spread it, and enough people start thinking it's real and it affects that person negatively, then you are at fault.

I think in the end, there are a lot of factors that go into it. How realistic the depiction is a factor. If the person is a public figure or not is another factor. How wide an audience you spread it to also.

If you have a teacher and you doodle a sketch of them getting railed and show it to your mates, that's rude but I think it's mostly fine, you're just having a laugh. But what if you make it a supper realistic drawing? It starts getting kind of weird right? And then if you publish that on the internet on a public platform, it gets really weird, you definitely shouldn't do that.

 

[Parasma]

I've been noticing how retarded people who dedicate their whole or part of personality to being anti ai. It can be just regular retardation or lack of social skills.There is a xitter account I've been following whose whole point is to bait as many anti-ai and or other types of spergs and I just wanted to share this gem.



xittah link
An example of the posts you can expect from this account:

xittah post
You'll think no one will fall for obvious bate like this, but A LOT OF THEM ACTUALLY DO.
Here is some of them.

Spoiler: Case 1

Spoiler: Case 2

Spoiler: Case 3

Spoiler: Case 4

Spoiler: Case 5

Spoiler: Case 6

 

[Aero the Alcoholic Bat]

I think this is the key issue here. Distributing those images publicly. You can imagine anything you want in your head, but when you start spreading it to others it can be like a form of slander.

And even then, having to use your imagination takes work. AI doesn't, not nearly as much.

And in the former case, you may even decide that it's too much unnecessary work to be a pervert, so you stop and move on and spend your brainpower on something more productive.

 

[linchan]

Why are we powerscaling ethical gooning.

 

[femboy fart huffer]

I fucking hate AI to my core, never expected to post in this thread.

Tbf most people here also hate that shit. No one here actually likes the indian spam either. Don't forget that ai is bad because it's a worthless use of resources and only shits out the same soulless dogshit for engagement when you read those comments.

Looks like AI to me

Crazy how we've come so far and ai still cannot generate a tree that looks real. Idk if I would say it's 100% ai generated, to me looks like some traditional media and probably ai assets edited together by a person. But yea man if that's slop then Christ I wouldn't like to see any of these people go to an art museum. Damn this fucking straight white male Christianslop I don't get it it's just people where's the furry sex? I wonder if these people all have the same view of art as ethanisonline does? It'd explain a lot.

There is a special place in whatever hell downies go to for people who acknowledge a post is ragebait and think that they are 'winning' by saying that the person is posting it for attention. Congrats, you are just as retarded as the people who didn't realise it was ragebait, honestly maybe worse. If you have the ability to identify a problem but continue to not only do nothing about it but actively choose to make it worse then you are worse than someone who never noticed the problem. Literally the single trait every lolcow has in common is doing exactly that. Just ratio the random person ragebaiting online and ai will disappear bro trust me. Just keep spamming out low effort slop for engagement in their replies to show that them shitting out low effort slop for engagement is bad.

And even then, having to use your imagination takes work. AI doesn't, not nearly as much.

Aphantasia moment. I can imagine my favourite characters doing literally anything much quicker than any ai generator, fuck I can imagine it quicker than I can type out a prompt. Let alone trying to get them to do some wack shit that's harder to prompt.

Why are we powerscaling gooning.

Let a man have hobbies smh.

 

[linchan]

Let a man have hobbies smh.

I'm just asking you guys to be productive. Like should AI be treated as a valid way to train for competative gooning, or should it be treated like steroids and banned from any competition.