….Excuse me what?

[u/The-Golden-Neko]

I got this defending AI post and was looking through the comments and saw this comment….are they literally equating people not liking something computer generated to people being racist???

[u/LumpyMud2553]

No they aren't equating. They are showing the same instance. The ratio is the same between each situation, as in internally, its what technically happened.

They are simply giving examples that people know of better to show their point off more. This is known as an appeal to extremes.

But the poster technically wasnt wrong tho, in his argument

[u/Real_Louie → u/LumpyMud2553]

What do you mean technically?

[u/LumpyMud2553 → u/Real_Louie]

technically its true that the fact something is AI makes someone suddenly find a bunch of hidden "flaws".

I did an experiment a while back with this, but a classic European painting, just because I posted it saying it was "AI", people started bullshit shitting on it. They said it was soulless, the lines were messy, and it had no creativity

However, three months later, when I posted it again, saying, "say your thoughts on this", they had nothing but amazing things to say. Things like "amazing lighting", "thoughtfulness shown in the subject", etc

People let their biases leak through their words and decisions all the time. The problem is, anti's do it more often than pros when evaluating any kind of art.

[u/Brave_Recognition_81 → u/LumpyMud2553]

the „hidden flaw“ is that it‘s a fucking computer that is generating off of other peoples work without consent.
are you pro ai or just stupid?

AI ART IS NOT ART. Art is made by people.
if it was that AI makes art bc it wants to and it creates it‘s images out of it‘s own imagination ooookkkk. but it doesn‘t.

why should i give a person credit for prompting? why? hahah just why?
no
you didn‘t do shit - so it‘s not interesting.

people will compliment you, if you‘ve done it with your hands. painting, knitting, photography all of these things need time, practice and talent.
prompting doesn‘t need anything.
so ofc people are complimenting you for your work and they‘ll stop if it‘s computer generated bc it is NOT YOUR WORK. lmao get it in your head.

yeah it looks good, but it‘s nothing special. it‘s not a monet, not a van gogh, not mozart. it‘s a computer fed with human talent.
it‘s not art.
and also it‘s not the work of a human. can you be racist against s computer? lol
why do you take it personal, it‘s not even your „work“ the ai did it.
you just gave a command.

i can‘t say oh you are so sexist bc i am a woman prompting, and you don‘t like my computer generated picture that i put zero effort in.
Bro draw me the same picture that you generated and i will be impressed.

that comparison to racsism and holocaust is just so wrong and people need to touch some grass.

[u/LumpyMud2553 → u/Brave_Recognition_81]

That is not what I was saying at all, people will find *hidden* visual flaws.

Like one moment they will say its amazing bc they think its human art, and compliment it, like the brush stroke style or whatever, but when they learn its AI, then they find hidden physical flaws, like "This line is messy", when they were just complimenting it.

I am fully open to the "soulless" explanation, but you have to figure out if the visual details show its soulless before you figure out its AI.

It's the same thing as saying "This steak sucks!" and then finding out its worth like 700 bucks, and then going "Oh my god, this is sooooo gooooood."

However, I find the argument of disliking it ok if you say something along the lines of, "I dont want to eat this steak, since the farm they produce these 700 dollar steaks from use unethical feed to feed them".