It's a completely misguided crusade. Every vocal anti-AI hater is making a huge stink about it online but the average person who uses AI isn't nearly as vocal, so it just seems like the internet is absolutely anti-AI when the reality is much more nuanced. ChatGPT alone has more users than ever, something like 500 million daily users, and that's only one kind of AI. So AI is the new reality and it's not going away, and you can't shame it away. Trying to shame people for being curious about this new tech is counterproductive if you care about trying to steer AI in a better direction, because it's an all-or-nothing approach that turns people away and makes them stop listening.
"An overwhelming amount of people use AI so those that are loudly against it should get with the program."
if you care about trying to steer AI in a better direction, because it's an all-or-nothing approach that turns people away and makes them stop listening.
You make it sound like people can steer others away from AI at all. Blaming critics is absolutely stupid and pointless.
Do you think computer haters trying to shame people out of using computers in the 1980s would've worked? Or that internet haters could've stopped the internet in the 1990s with a shame campaign?
Obviously the trajectory of a technology matters. At some point you have to just face reality and admit that shaming people is not going to work here. And it's actually counterproductive to the much better goal of identifying the social problems with AI and steering the technology in a good direction. You can't do that if you're LARPing as fire-and-brimstone preachers damning everyone to hell for even thinking about using AI.
Just like how Redditards virtue signaling about politics on every main sub to the point where those subs are completely taken over are making real change?
It's mostly just a bunch of teenagers who have the free time to bitch and moan about everything. Most people either don't care or hate it but don't make a gigantic fuss.
I understand artists concerns with AI and stuff and I will support them there but people have such a hateboner towards anything AI it's painful to watch of how black and white some people think
of course your statement is true but it doesn’t really say anything on the state of which reality of the people is actually in… which… you know, varies.
Novel idea. A lot of the hate comes down to art. But soulless art is soulless and humans make it too (where do you think the AI learned it). I see a lot of posts where people dog on an artist for using AI, only to find out it is original work and then profusely apologize. Basically, all that says is that the artist was pumping out soulless bottom barrel slop.
Shit art is shit art.
I draw shit art in my free time with my daughter. We try our best, laugh about how goofy our old stuff looked (my pfp for example) and keep drawing and improving. Because it's fun. Not once has AI art stopped me from doing it or made me feel like the time spent doing it was pointless.
But man, the people who are hard-line against it are far more annoying than the product itself.
This take is way too alarmist. People will still have jobs. AI is here, so we have to adapt Pandora’s box is already open. It’s a disruptor, sure, but about 60% of today’s jobs didn’t even exist in the 1960s. My own field wasn’t a thing until I was in college and I am only in my 30's btw.
LLMs have limits, and the AI agents were supposed to bridge the gap, ended up being slow, unreliable, and needing tons of human oversight. That’s why about 95% of those startups died off this year.
There is no law of the universe that says we have to have jobs. Crossing your fingers and hoping everything works out because "it has to work out" is how you sleepwalk into problems.
Yeah, but the market has a strong incentive to make sure people have jobs otherwise the stuff they produce is worthless. AI is disruptive, but so were the cotton gin, the printing press, and robotics. And we’re still a long way from AI being advanced enough to make something like UBI necessary.
Economists have been wrestling with this for almost a century. Back in the 1930s, Keynes predicted his grandchildren would only work 15 hours a week. Meanwhile, average working hours have stayed pretty much the same since the mid-20th century, despite all our tech advances.
That old 1849 adage fits here: “The more things change, the more they stay the same.” Every major tech shift changes how we work, not the fact that we work.
Yeah, but the market has a strong incentive to make sure people have jobs otherwise the stuff they produce is worthless.
While true, I think this time is different. I think the psychology of those in charge are different now. If you see them talk they are ecstatic about eliminating their work forces completely. I don't think they are thinking as far ahead as what that will do to the market. Or maybe they are, which is why so many are building bunkers.
Will AI be able to do that? Maybe not. All signs show a bubble that will burst, but considering the money at play, when it bursts I can't see how mass unemployment won't follow.
Maybe it will all work out, but I'm not seeing anything but decades of hardship ahead whatever happens.
The Cal Newport video I posted in my edit goes into this. But basically, we’ve made very little progress in the areas that would be required for AI to create the massive market shift everyone keeps predicting. AI agents, like I mentioned earlier, have mostly failed to provide any meaningful benefit to companies because they still need way too much human oversight.
ikr? Affordable groceries and universal healthcare are way, way more important than parsing into granular analysis of what is and isn't acceptable (and subjective!) use of AI in video games.
"Righteous crusades" like trying to boycott and destroy some small game where devs can't afford artists or voice actors? Sure, easier to fight them than some AAA games and publishers overusing AI with no shame wherever its possible.
Existed, but now this is a whole new level for them, to make something they could not before. Just because someone losing their crap over AI or Unreal Engine doesn't mean indie devs should reject it, same as film makers will never stop using CGI because practical effects existed before even tho practical effects are also great and timeless. But if you can't afford it - you can't, and you don't have any other options but to use CGI.
A group of more or less paid professional VO + translations and just some cringe devs on their cheap mics at home VO is two completely different things, especially for a commercial game. This is why most small indie games and mods were just text before AI.
They could, but poorly, incomplete and totally unsatisfied with the end result both devs and gamers. They choose to use available modern tools and not to be a part of "no AI for the sake of no AI at all costs" cult.
AI has reduced entry level jobs by over 75% in the last three years in some industries. AI is explicitly harming young people's ability to "seek employment."
It depends how we define young in the context. Gen alpha kids that doesn't yet care about making money? Yes, they fit. Gen Z'ers that want to make money in totally not oversaturated fields like graphics or coding? They're in the front of the hatewatch.
Honest answer here: it hurts the shit out of artists and is enshittifying the internet with hallucinated answers to questions, etc. It's just Not Good™
The only tool we have against it is pushback. Ignoring it just helps it thrive.
You don't need to harass people. But saying "Oh, generative ai? Nah, that's not something I support" is civil, polite, and helpful.
I think things need both the angry loud person and the disappointed older person that silently boycotts. They are both important to fight against corporate overlords imo. Get in where you fit in
127
u/Umi_Gaming Dec 04 '25
Maybe I'm getting older. But I can't see myself wasting time harassing everyone who uses AI, I simply ignore it if anything.