734
Art is inherent in us. Just like the need to put boobs on mythical lizard creatures.
this post was submitted on 22 Apr 2025
734 points (94.9% liked)
Fuck AI
2537 readers
919 users here now
"We did it, Patrick! We made a technological breakthrough!"
A place for all those who loathe AI to discuss things, post articles, and ridicule the AI hype. Proud supporter of working people. And proud booer of SXSW 2024.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Drawing boobs is second only to the instinct to draw cocks.
If that Heavy Metal episode of South Park has taught me anything, it's that everything looks better with boobs.
“Nothing will stop real artists from making art.”
Exactly. AI images are not going to eliminate art. They just make it more difficult for artists to compete under capitalism.
The solution is to abandon capitalism. Not stop tech development.
Wish in one hand and shit in the other and see which one fills up first.
load more comments
(3 replies)
Back to rock, huh?
Wait until people remember you can just hit the AI bros with rocks
I've always been confused about this train of thought, because it seems to justify the opposite of what it's trying to say.
I mean, if the argument is people will use whatever garbage they have on hand to make art... presumably that includes generative AI? Look, I lived through four decades of people making art out of ASCII. My bar for acceptance for this stuff is really low. You give people a thing that makes pictures in any way and you'll get a) pictures of dicks and b) pictures of other things.
I don't think GenAI will kill human art for the same reasons I don't think AI art is even in competition with human art. I may be moved or impressed by a generated image, but it'll be for different reasons and in different scales than I'm... eh... moved and impressed by hot dragon rock lady here. Just like I can be impressed by the artistry in a photo but not for the same reasons I'm impressed by an oil painting. Different media, different forms of expression, different skill sets.
Nothing will kill art itself, GenAI will simply be incorporated as another tool
Killing the ability to make money from art AND the bs that corporations are pulling in regards to AI, profit and making line go up is what people are mad about, but that anger is constantly misplaced leading to lines of thought like this lol
I believe this states the take many have - much like nobody batted an eye about auto-contrast, content-aware fill, or line smoothing. They weren't trying to replace humans with programs, weren't causing huge environmental impact, and weren't trained on stolen content. It's the ham-handed implementation that most are opposed to, combined with the obnoxious techbro mentality.
load more comments
(22 replies)
I think the argument is that an AI "artist" is incapable of creating art. Their "tool" does the work for them. Whereas other artists use digital tools but as just that - tools. The art comes from the artist.
load more comments
(28 replies)
This is gonna confuse an archaeologist in a few millennia.
Archaeologists:
Archaeologists will just call it a ritualistic artifact. Like they already do with every piece of ancient porn they find.
Around the 2000's a new pagan religion emerged, by the name of Furry. The believers of Furry followed human-animal hybrid spirits, often honoring them through depictions in the arts and even some costumes. A lot of these spirits might have been fertility gods.
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
arouse
i say this as nicely as I can, you dont need expensive and exploitative algorithms to make art. i dont really care if you say you cant make anything, put a pen to paper and draw. your terrible scribble has infinitely more value than anything a tech company's software can generate using stolen data. and after you crumple that up and throw it away, get another sheet of paper and do it again, and again, until your wrist snaps apart, and I guarantee you will not only have learned something about yourself but you will be more of an artist than any tech bro using chatgpt
People use AI for making “art” not because of their lack of ability to create art per se, but they use it rather as a way to cut costs in their commercial projects and skip contracting real artists. This is why it's malicious. I wouldn't care if somoeone uses it for pure, private leisure.
Haven't seen this on here yet
I've seen it 3 times already.
But why give a lizard boobs? They don't have boobs!
That's where the fire is stored
Warm cushions when not breathing fire
It's not a lizard.
It's a dragon.
Dragons could have boobs, I've never seen one.
Have you ever seen a giant, flying, fire breathing dragon IRL that didn't have boobs?
Non-mammals lacking mammary glands?! Say it ain't so.
And the first thing that came to mind after typing that? Lobster-titties
load more comments
(1 replies)
Because it's hot
load more comments
(3 replies)
The future is approaching. When society will collapse a new Furry-Stone age will begin...
Supreme Court: that's not art that's pornography. I cant exactly define pornography, but "you know it when you see it."
:P
load more comments
(2 replies)
view more: next ›