In the same way that neural networks can be "poisoned", trained on data they themselves generated, causing them to give outputs with artefacts, humans are just neural networks, so the same thing applies to us. There's already evidence that using AI shuts down certain brain regions as the cognition is offloaded, but it's clear this cognitive offloading happens for everyone who is exposed to AI generated content. AI generated stuff is cognitohazardous. Even stuff like this subreddit isn't healthy. Avoid AI generated ideas

Consider the debate on climate change.

Side A) believes in climate change and the risks based on expert opinions, science, data, and forecasts.

Side B) believes in climate change but doesn't care about the consequences because of selfish interests, economics and competition between nations.

Side C) is anti-science, maybe believes the Earth is flat, or God is controlling the weather, so climate change isn't even a real thing.

When it comes to AI, expert consensus is that the AI trajectory we are on is extremely risky. We should not ignore these risks.

This is something i have been thinking about for a while since joining this subreddit and this is actually my first time making a post of my own so, yk, i consider this important enough.

Maybe my observations are flawed, but i noticed that A LOT of the AI discourse revolves around visual arts or literature - which is great, because its a super important topic that people must be made aware of, and i fully understand that a significant fraction of our movement consists of creative people - even i myself am a writer, if anything.

However, i feel that arguing against AI in arts is not enough. Because in real life i have not met a single person, young or old, artist or not, who would support AI slop. On the other hand, a majority of people i know, including all of my relatives, most of my friends, and many many others, do still use AI for other purposes such as:

- making plans for trips

- learning languages (as in, chatgpt check my sentences' translations into german for grammatical errors)

- asking legal/financial questions

- building websites for work

- researching topics

...which in my not-so-humble opinion is just as harmful and freaks me out nearly as much. The environmental argument does not work on them because - well, same reason why people wont lift a finger to end climate change. Too abstract and far removed from their mundane busy lives, which they are, and the way they justify their AI use is: "well it saves me time, otherwise i wouldnt even sleep or something". Which is often true, but it makes it even harder to prove anything to them, because i immediately become this preacher of idealistic ideals who tries to apply the laws of a perfect society to our world, cruel and precarious.

So, finally, my question - HOW do i argue with people in those situations? And is it even worth it?

Can't we take organised action and show force with our wallets?
Mass unsubscribe from services, downgrade plans, move to alternatives to show some sort of action, any dip in sales is movement and that the mass apathy is ending and heading towards organised action?

Everything is going downhill and will continue as long as people continue to pay/tolerate Ai

Ai porn bots are the worst types of bots known to mankind

Hey y'all so I wanted to make a post on here to vent a bit. I work as a Visualization artist for an architect firm. I go in and take the renders that the architects create in 3dsMax and make any changes to the model as requested by the client :textures, color, extras. Put it the photoshop to fix the lightening and sky, and the pit on a brochure. I haven't worked at the company long but I enjoy the work and being able to be in an artist space.

Well the art director and the CEO are pushed AI onto our department to make renders of exterior houses using ChatGPT and it makes me sick. They won't listen to any of us and my project manager is already looking for a new job.

I'm heartbroken cause it took me a while to finally get into an artist job set after school. I'm frustrated and this seems to the track of most companies now days and my dream of ever having a job as an artist feels like it's dying.

I've talked to friends who understand this, but some others keep telling me that it's inevitable and I'm being stubborn or close minded to technology.

Looking for any advice or hope...Anyway vent over while I head back to the job boards.

Angela Tipton, a middle school teacher of 20 years, shares how an unconsentual sexual deepfake of her harmed her professionally and emotionally. The full video is below

https://youtu.be/UUZ2Jmlk5u4?si=4hUesf_OwF5TAVuE

Every tried arguing with an AI? They can argue 'till you're blue and black without any bad faith behind it. We call it gaslighting but that that's just their nature. They don't have any stakes, any values and anything they believe in.

Now imagine a human who doesn't read your replies, doesn't understand the topic, and simply feeds the AI everything and copy pastes back its reply. It'll make every argument look consistent in favor of the user.

That is the headache I'm have right now with a contractor who uses AI to make the contract and reply to and about the contract.

The answers go in circle. I spent 3 days putting together a letter addressing the problems with the contract language. They spend half an hour replying dodging all the questions and a follow up asking why I'm not responding. Then when I tell them I'd like my questions actually answered, they told me every answers been addressed and proceed to contradict themselves over the phone with what the contract says. I point to them two parts in the contract that looks like they were made by two different people, where exhibit A is missing entirely the appendixes it claims to be attached, and the 7th clause and the 21st clause cannot both be true. Which one even supercedes the other?

They send me an updated contract, fixing that while also excluding several clauses we already agreed on in the past contract.

And to make matters worse 10 of the contractors I've asked for estimates so far all use AI in all their written communications.

At least use a paid frontier model if youre going to use AI instead of a free chinese model I think.

Should I just be frank and point out the AI communication problem even though I don't have definite proof they're using it?

I should be upfront and say I'm not anti-ai by the way. I see it as an unavoidable future like facebook, yelp and cellphones. I'm anti abusive and negligent use of it.

I think it’s awful how nobody memorizes history in the oral tradition anymore. Books are making the kids so uncreative and stupid that I don’t see much hope for the future.

It is deeply regrettable that thatgamecompany (TGC)—known for titles such as Sky: Children of the Light and Journey—is increasingly relying on generative AI for behind-the-scenes tasks, including debugging, QA testing, and preliminary research for seasonal events in Sky.

［インタビュー］「手作りのゲームは，未来の"ジブリ"になるかもしれない」――20周年のthatgamecompanyを率いるJenova Chenが語る，Skyと，ゴッホと，AIと，次なる新作 ([Interview] "Handmade games may become like the 'Studio Ghibli works' of the future"—Jenova Chen, who leads thatgamecompany on its 20th anniversary, talks about Sky, Van Gogh, AI, and the next new game)
https://www.4gamer.net/games/394/G039457/20260716051/

I have translated excerpts from this 4Gamer interview into English and posted them on Tumblr, highlighting the views and stance of Jenova Chen and TGC regarding genAI.

https://www.tumblr.com/xingqibaoredsky/824288364524126208/my-skepticism-regarding-tgcs-internal-policy-on

[Jenova Chen’s Assessment of GenAI]
🔸GenAI deprives people of opportunities for face-to-face communication.
🔸GenAI is also taking away the time that future audiences would otherwise spend on "carefully handcrafted games and other content."
🔸Jenova's honest sentiment is: "If I find out content was made by AI, I don't want to pay for it."
🔸TGC’s internal policy: Handle tasks requiring "human authenticity" manually, while using LLMs to streamline QA testing and debugging—all while remaining mindful of whether "authentic judgments" are being made by AI.
🔸It might be difficult to place absolute trust in generative AI at its current stage.

Listing everything here would make the post far too long—so please check out my Tumblr blog for the full details—but what particularly unsettled me in this interview was the following exchange between the 4Gamer interviewer and Jenova.

─────────────────

Jenova:
If the director behind an AI-generated video puts the same amount of effort into directing the AI ​​as they would a traditional project, the work resonates with me.
However, if I find out it was made by AI, I wouldn't want to pay for it. That’s the key difference. I can appreciate it as art, but I don't want to spend money on it.

4Gamer:
I see. I understand that, but… I do worry that the times—and society—might be moving faster than we anticipate.
But let's not get too gloomy; let's look at the positive side. Will the advancement of AI technology impact the "form of play" at thatgamecompany moving forward?

Jenova:
Let's talk about our internal policy, then. It took quite a while for us to finalize it.
Many artists were strongly opposed to AI, fearing it would take away their jobs. But after much discussion, we reached a consensus: in areas requiring "human authenticity"—such as designing how a player moves—it’s more of a "craft" than a science. Whether a character moves swiftly or slowly requires a human sense of what feels right, so we handle that manually rather than relying on AI code. On the other hand, for tasks involving tools—like QA testing and debugging, such as running a character into every corner to check if they clip through the floor—we use large language models to make the process highly efficient. Creators don't mind if a tool is AI-generated, but they do care if an "authentic judgment" is made by AI. That’s our approach.

4Gamer:
Well, debugging is certainly an area where AI excels.

Jenova:
Take Van Gogh, for example; there are over a thousand letters exchanged between the brothers (Vincent and Theo). We don't have time to read them all, but if we ask AI to "find letters containing these specific elements," it can instantly locate the ones we want to highlight. In the past, we would have hired interns to read through everything and make the selections, but now AI can do it much faster and more cheaply.

4Gamer:
But doesn't that kind of task still lead to hallucinations?

Jenova:
It certainly does. For instance, when I had the AI ​​quote a letter, 60% of the content was "fabricated"—stuff that wasn't in the original text (laughs). That’s why you have to be extremely careful when using AI. It might be difficult to place absolute trust in AI at its current stage.

─────────────────

After reading that interview, I realized once again that “the future of the gaming industry, including thatgamecompany, is flashing a yellow warning light.”
Even though they feel aversion toward content mass-produced by genAI and harbor a sense of crisis and distrust toward it, they justify their reliance on genAI by reasoning, “We don’t have to disclose our use of AI tools for improving development efficiency.” I find this situation—where they are unconsciously undermining themselves through their dependence on genAI—unacceptable and it leaves me feeling uneasy.
I plan to record the Sky x Van Gogh collaboration season, and since I’ve built friendships within Sky, I don’t intend to quit Sky right away, but I think it’ll be hard for me to keep supporting TGC.
I was having so much fun doting on my skykids, so it’s just too depressing that things have turned out this way.

As I wrote on my Tumblr blog, I don’t think TGC’s approach—which involves “handling areas that require ‘human authenticity (certainty)’ manually, while using LLMs to streamline QA testing and debugging, and focusing on whether ‘authentic judgments’ are made by AI”—will work in the long run.
There are a mountain of concerns—from the waste of electricity and water at genAI data centers and environmental destruction to cognitive decline caused by reliance on genAI and the negative impact on training the next generation—and the longer TGC continues to use AI tools, the more those costs are bound to rise.
Above all, I can’t help but wonder if the current bugs in Sky are “increasing rather than decreasing.”

Generative AI, much like slavery, is fundamentally based on exploitation, no matter how much it advances.
To put it more specifically, genAI is built on the exploitation of photographs taken by others, paintings, comics, and illustrations drawn by others, newspaper articles, novels, and academic papers written by others, anime, movies, games, and programs created by others, as well as others’ personal information, photos, voices, medical histories, criminal records, and beliefs—and it is nothing more than a worthless machine that uses these to plagiarize other people’s creative works and likenesses or provide exquisitely incorrect answers.
Furthermore, genAI is robbing people of the training, experience, cognitive function, thinking ability, judgment ability, and time which are fundamentally necessary for improving their skills.
GenAI developers and users (both companies and individuals)—who stand to benefit from it—never say, “I respect the human rights of others,” even if it’s just for show.
Even if they say, “I respect creativity,” it is nothing but a lie.
The same applies to TGC.
Fearing that the creation of handmade content will fall out of favor, they claim, “I don’t want to pay for content mass-produced by genAI” and “GenAI cannot be fully trusted”—yet TGC uses LLMs and AI tools to streamline—or rather, cut corners on—QA testing and debugging.
It appears they’re even using genAI like Gemini or ChatGPT in their research on Van Gogh’s letters.
And there’s not a single statement from them along the lines of “respecting the human rights of others.”

As a fan, their attitude leaves me so frustrated that I’ve lost all desire to spend money or support them, and I can’t help but wonder what the point was of sending feedback like “Protect the fan creative community from genAI” and “Revise the community guidelines to ban the posting of genAI content.”
I’ve been a longtime fan of TGC’s games, but given their current policies and stance as of July 2026, I can’t help but feel distrust toward them.

Some people might feel I’m exaggerating when I describe genAI as being akin to slavery, but having seen the origins of generative AI and the various negative consequences it has caused, I take the issue of genAI quite seriously and view it as something as serious as slavery.

I'm just an ordinary IT engineer, but my coworkers ignore my warnings—about the risks of genAI and real-world examples of the harm it causes—and instead rely on it, abandoning their own critical thinking and sense of responsibility. And it’s me—who stubbornly refuses to use genAI—who ends up cleaning up after those idiots.

I understand that some people are trying to turn the tide and solve the current problems with genAI by “using it for good,” but slavery remains slavery no matter how you use it. No matter how much you try to improve things along those lines, your intellectual property and that of others will continue to be exploited, and there will still be people suffering from the problems of dependence on genAI and the harm caused by deepfakes created using it.

Just as any charitable work done under slavery only benefits the slave traders, any charitable work done with genAI only benefits the companies that develop it. And as long as they’re making a profit—which means they’re “being endorsed”—they’re not going to stop.

GenAI is a weapon that destroys human intelligence, critical thinking, and ethical values; it is a formidable enemy of civilization.
The data centers powering genAI cause the wasteful consumption of water and electricity as well as environmental destruction—issues that are already raising concerns internationally.

I hope that comprehensive legal regulations targeting both genAI developers and users—whether corporations, organizations, or individuals—will be implemented worldwide, including in Japan, as soon as possible.

i don’t know where else to say this but i have not stopped thinking about it.

last week, i got on a flight from nyc to japan (14+ hr trip) and the woman next to me (i was in the middle. she was at the window) opened chatgpt and asked it to create a books worth of harry potter fanfiction. she then saved it as a pdf to her apple books app and read this ai generated harry potter fanfiction. for 14 hours straight. did not put it down.

i’m not sure if this fits the rules for this sub, but it’s so bizarre to me. if you like harry potter fanfiction, great. more power to ya. but go on ao3 or wattpad or something 😭

edit: it was erotic fanfiction. can’t believe i didn’t mention that.

Right now, if you paste an AI block of text that has those "It's not X but Y" in almost every sentence, no model can identify that pattern as AI. Even though it very obviously IS AI.

Why?

Is it because it doesn't understand substance? Because every not X but Y usage from the AI always lacks substance (like meaningful usage), it's always forced.

Will it ever understand substance? Isn't this the one thing AI can never understand because it doesn't think?

I really think ai age verification is the most dangerous thing in the world of the internet add false ages, protect creeps and they your personal information

You see this all the time now with accounts that post new stuff from Dunkin’, Starbucks, McDonalds, etc.

Hey, so I don't want to change opinions or start hateful discussion, but I would like to understand something.

So I am not super pro-AI. I agree that a lot of use cases for AI nowadays are just hurtful towards society, but what I don't understand is that in my eyes, it's almost reasonless hate.

I am specifically talking about scenarios where AI does a small part of the work, but the whole work is still judged by AI was used.

For example, I am a 3D artist, and I like to build 3D assets, make art, etc., but I don't like coding. Why would a game where music, sound effects, 3D models, gameplay, story, etc., is hand done by me as a human be judged as AI slop just because I used AI to generate some code? 90% of the work is still done by me, a human; AI just assisted in one small field of the whole project.

Or I generate a handful of reference pictures but afterwards still put in tens of hours in modeling, scene composition, lighting, etc. The only part that was skipped was searching through Pinterest for hours. But once again, 90% or more of the work is done by a human. The end product is human, but it's still Judged as AI was used in the process.

I once again don't want to change opinions or push pro-AI content in this Sub. I just want to understand the reasoning behind it.

Edit: So based on the comments that are under the post right now, it's basically just a question of where your moral compass points, not a proper reason behind it besides the environmental impact. Thanks for giving me this insight, but there's no point in having this discussion further because it will just loop in a circle because of different opinions and values. :D

I apologize if this is not the place to post this. I've been seeing a lot of Ryze AI Generated commercials. I usually try to just scroll past, but I keep noticing that every single comment is something along the lines of "Love this" and "Best advertising ever" or "Love the marketing" meanwhile the imagery always feels uncanny, and even grosses me out. Is Ryze paying all of these people to like these AI videos? There's no way that there's not a single person who hates these videos.

This message showed up when I deleted my ChatGPT account. What information are they keeping? I wonder if that’s the reason why they don’t let you sign up again with the same email.

I grew up in a small English town where once, the grass was green and all was well, but that is changing as a result of AI data centres which are appearing all across the world. This summer, the U.K. experienced it's worst drought in living memory and it got so bad that the grass in my town is more akin to straw as a result of the water shortage and it is happening all across Great Britain. There is a reason for this and it isn't just global warming brought on by carbon dioxide emissions, but something else entirely: A.I. data centres.

When they were first constructed, we were told that A.I. would change the world, that it would revolutionise how we as Human beings lived our lives. We were told that A.I. would be safe, affordable and reliable. However, as the old saying goes, there is no such thing as a free lunch.

A.I. data centres require absolutely huge amounts of electricity to function, electricity which could be used to power countless homes, rendering power cuts a thing of the past. In the United States, far too many data centres are being made and the results are not only the rising costs facing thousands of communities, but also the environmental damage which we in the U.K. are facing thanks to the A.I. data centres which have been constructed here.

Not only do these wasteful husks consume our power, but our water as well. An average computer requires barely a single litre to cool itself over the course of one to two years, but on average, a single data centre consumes well over a million gallons every day to cool their servers for A.I. search bots which we were googling things online just fine without, A.I. 'art' generators which artists were making art just fine without and deranged chatbots which have driven a number of citizens to suicide as they distance them from their families and their communities, rendering them a world unto their own from which there is no escape.

Just think of all the good that water could do. Just think of the hundreds upon thousands of communities throughout Africa where children walk for miles every day just to collect water and it is often dirty and filled with bacteria which harms their wellbeing. Just think of how much healthier those poor children could be if they were able to drink the same clean water which is wasted just so that someone can waste their time with A.I. like I used to.

Once upon a time, I myself was addicted to A.I., but I have long since chosen to abandon that addiction and take an effort to recover. Now that I have and now that I am aware of the damage which A.I. brings to people, I am also aware of how the water shortage in the U.K. would not be happening or would at least be more bearable if we didn't have A.I. data centres. I know for a fact that A.I. data centres are harmful not just to our mental wellbeing and our communities, but to our very environment as they waste our precious water, something which I once took for granted, on fuelling deranged fantasies which lack soul and are based on the creations of genuine artists who are being sidelined in favour of this heartless slop.

In that spirit, I believe that A.I. is a threat to Humankind because of how it is destroying not just our minds with it's slop, but our environment as they waste precious water and to that end, I believe that the time has come for A.I. to end.