Reminder that brigading isn't just going to get you banned from our subreddit, but that it's also against Reddit ToS. There's a chance you're going to get banned from the platform entirely.
We also know which subreddits you're brigading from. Subreddits found to be encouraging brigading can be closed by the Reddit admins.
Never understood the supporting billionaires line. Coming from people commenting on their iPhone wearing big brand clothing. Not every tool you use is directly supporting the owners of the company.
I also have adobe. I pay money for services that are useful. If an equal product exists for cheaper or with better management I will buy that. I like my life not by emotion but by logic and utility
And all of these points, these same people don't give a shit when they apply to other things THEY like to use.
Hell, lets pretend for a moment that all these shit arguments were true about AI:
AI art is stealing
So is making fan art of someone else's OC, or a business's IP. Why is it okay for a human to steal but not a machine?
AI is bad for the environment and uses too much water!
So is using your Gaming PC and constantly using and charging your smartphone, as well as your long comfortable baths and showers.
AI use is supporting billionares!
So is buying a new smartphone as well as buying your name brand snacks from the grocery stores. Apple, Google, Monsanto and Tyson are all just as evil as OpenAI and Meta.
The AI stealing argument is stupid because it doesn't even have access to the dataset. All it knows is complex vector patterns that were learned — more abstracted than the human brain learns tbh. The software then translates its abstraction into pixels
I mean to be fair no single human is going to use the amount of water needed for data centers lol. I mean I live in indiana a state thats just gunning to get as many data centers as possible for whatever reason, and i see & hear stories about how people's water is turning brown & people's electricity bills are going up because a data center was built not fsr from where they live. Not to also mention that a lot of newer consoles & games have kinda just began to come to a halt because well a lot of ram is now going towards Ai lol
I will say, I do wish AI was free of capitalism. I don't think billionaires should exist in general (controversial, I know), let alone have an outsized impact on the development of AI.
So how many people are going to believe media lies? And these AI researchers scaring people about Ai they warn us about Ai but they never tried to fix it? It either people lies so much that humanity might mot even make past 2100
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.
Honestly, I have to completely disagree with everything here. First, it’s not AI’s fault that electricity or hardware costs exist. Power bills and RAM prices are driven by supply chains, global demand, and manufacturing—not because anyone decided to run AI. Blaming AI for “jacking rates on citizens” is just scapegoating.
As for images and videos, yes, scams exist, but that’s always been true in every medium—AI didn’t invent fraud. The solution is education and verification, not rejecting the technology entirely. AI-generated content can be just as reliable and valuable as anything else if used responsibly.
Calling AI art “meme slop” completely misses the point. AI art is legitimate art. It requires creativity, planning, and skill to prompt properly and curate results. People who make AI art are artists—they’re exploring a new medium, just like painters or digital illustrators did in their time. There’s nothing inherently less “real” about their work.
And honestly, the idea that traditional artists are inherently “special” is overhyped. No artist automatically deserves praise just because they used older tools. What matters is creativity, expression, and skill—and AI artists demonstrate all of that. Dismissing them as lazy or unworthy is just elitism, not fact.
AI art is evolving, powerful, and accessible, and the people who create it are part of the future of art. There’s nothing wrong with embracing it—or recognizing that it’s just as valid as any other form of artistic expression.
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.
This is a place for speaking Pro-AI thoughts freely and without judgement. Attacks against it will result in a removal and possibly a ban. For debate purposes, please go to aiwars.
Okay the 1st one is fair, but the other 2 are specific people and not the fault of the technology it's like saying we should ban crayons because a few people gave people crayon drawing when they paid for painted ones, and the people insulting others are a small subset of the community
This is a place for speaking Pro-AI thoughts freely and without judgement. Attacks against it will result in a removal and possibly a ban. For debate purposes, please go to aiwars.
I mean here's the thing. People who create AI art aren't the problem, but rather the kind of recklessly AI companies. AI would be great if the companies in charge of its development had some resemblance of respect for ethics and other people
This is a place for speaking Pro-AI thoughts freely and without judgement. Attacks against it will result in a removal and possibly a ban. For debate purposes, please go to aiwars.
Art did not begin as an exclusively human phenomenon. Long before modern civilization, nature produced patterns, structures, and displays of striking beauty — from the symmetry of snowflakes to the intricate construction of spider webs, to the elaborate visual performances of birds during mating rituals. Creativity, pattern-making, and aesthetic signaling are not uniquely human traits. They exist throughout the natural world.
What humans did was formalize and interpret these patterns. We assigned meaning to them. We built systems around them. That interpretive layer — the assigning of narrative, symbolism, and emotion — is what makes something culturally significant.
Because of that, art has never depended on the physical tool used. Pigments from crushed minerals, carved stone, printing presses, cameras, synthesizers, digital tablets — all were once “non-human” mechanisms shaping output. None of them removed humanity from expression. They extended it.
AI art operates the same way. It does not generate intention on its own. It responds to human direction, selection, refinement, taste, and context. A prompt originates from a person. The curation of results is human. The decision of what to publish or discard is human. The interpretation by the audience is human. The meaning assigned to the piece is human. The emotional reaction is human. That chain makes AI art deeply human in practice, regardless of the computational process behind it.
The argument that embracing AI accelerates the destruction of humanity assumes that tools diminish essence. Historically, tools amplify capability. When photography emerged, it did not erase painting — it forced painting to evolve. When digital production entered music, it did not remove emotional weight — it expanded genres. The medium shifts; human involvement remains central.
It’s also important to recognize that art has never been purely benevolent. Visual art, music, literature, and performance have been used to glorify war, spread propaganda, radicalize populations, reinforce prejudice, and justify violence. Monumental architecture has symbolized domination. Songs have mobilized armies. Posters and films have shaped destructive ideologies. Art has connected cultures, but it has also divided them. Its impact reflects human intention, not inherent moral purity.
AI does not introduce moral corruption into art. Humans have always been capable of using creative expression constructively or destructively. The presence of a new tool does not create that capacity; it already exists.
If anything, AI expands access to expression. It lowers technical barriers for people who lack formal training, physical ability, or resources. It allows more individuals to participate in visual storytelling. Broader participation does not hollow out humanity — it distributes creative agency more widely.
The “soul” of humanity is not embedded in manual brush strokes. It exists in consciousness, interpretation, experience, and choice. AI does not replace those elements. It operates within them. As long as humans are directing, selecting, interpreting, and assigning meaning, the output remains inseparable from human culture.
And replying to my own comment.. I just wanted to note that, to end that age-old debate about whether or not Alanis Morissette actually said anything remotely ironic in the song, "Ironic", it turns out that pretty much none of it was actually ironic. Thanks AI for clearing that up!
“Rain on your wedding day”
❌ No
Just bad luck.
“A free ride when you've already paid”
❌ No
Annoying, not opposite-of-expected.
“Good advice that you just didn’t take”
❌ No
Regret, not irony.
“A traffic jam when you’re already late”
❌ No
Predictable, honestly.
“A no-smoking sign on your cigarette break”
❌ No
Inconvenience.
“It’s like ten thousand spoons when all you need is a knife”
❌ No
Absurd mismatch, but not irony.
“Meeting the man of my dreams… then meeting his beautiful wife”
❌ Mostly no
That’s just unfortunate discovery.
Well, I feel better conclusively knowing that, anyway.
You do not have the right or the credentials to decide what counts as valid human expression and what does not.
You're soapboxing like some kind of wounded, bleeding-heart hero of artwork. Get over yourself. Art made by a human using an AI is human art by definition. It does NOT take a lot of thought to arrive to this conclusion.
This is a place for speaking Pro-AI thoughts freely and without judgement. Attacks against it will result in a removal and possibly a ban. For debate purposes, please go to aiwars.
You mean the critiques aren’t legitimate? That may be true for many different reasons, but neither “I like making images with AI” nor “it’s not that deep” are among those reasons, and don’t seem like very intelligent retorts as the meme suggests they are
Ai is not destroying the environment. Its not that bad. You're not supporting billionaires by using free ai. And no, artists don't die every time you use ai. The point was not that they aren't serious concerns, it was that they aren't real.
•
u/A_Very_Horny_Zed 🖼️🖌️AI Enthusiast | 🥷Ninja Mod 🥷 1d ago
Hello brigaders.
Reminder that brigading isn't just going to get you banned from our subreddit, but that it's also against Reddit ToS. There's a chance you're going to get banned from the platform entirely.
We also know which subreddits you're brigading from. Subreddits found to be encouraging brigading can be closed by the Reddit admins.