this post was submitted on 13 Mar 2026
378 points (95.7% liked)

Fuck AI

6316 readers
2274 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.

AI, in this case, refers to LLMs, GPT technology, and anything listed as "AI" meant to increase market valuations.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
VerbFlow@lemmy.world
MrMcGasion@lemmy.world
TootSweet@lemmy.world
BigMikeInAustin@lemmy.world
cynar@lemmy.world
drmeanfeel@lemmy.world
pavnilschanda@lemmy.world
CriticalMedicine@lemmy.world
WonderfulWanderer@lemmy.world
Communist@lemmy.ml
eatCasserole@lemmy.world
SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world
NutWrench@lemmy.world
Soup@lemmy.cafe
iAvicenna@lemmy.world
Tinks@lemmy.world
wizblizz@lemmy.world
corus_kt@lemmy.world
Prandom_returns@lemm.ee
JimSamtanko@lemm.ee
TrickDacy@lemmy.world
TheFriar@lemm.ee
ArmokGoB@lemmy.dbzer0.com
HawlSera@lemm.ee
andrew_bidlaw@sh.itjust.works
MeDuViNoX@sh.itjust.works
33550336@lemmy.world
Nougat@fedia.io
Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world
Sterile_Technique@lemmy.world
Quill7513@slrpnk.net
glowing_hans@sopuli.xyz
e8d79@discuss.tchncs.de
ThefuzzyFurryComrade@pawb.social
378
The band Rush just put out a handful of gross and lazy AI-gen music videos. So sick of this trend/degradation (media.piefed.world)
submitted 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) by zachpieces@piefed.world to c/fuck_ai@lemmy.world
56 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

This careless interpretation (if you can even call it that) completely misrepresents the meaning of the original work. It represents the idea of using a delicate touch to handle something with the idea of punching it like a child would instead. As another song by them put it:

“Don't feed the people

But we feed the machines”

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] night_petal@piefed.social 18 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

I doubt the band themselves have a whole lot of say (or even really care that much) over things like this at this point in their career. I'd say management/record label is likely where the blame should be on thus one.

[–] zachpieces@piefed.world 11 points 18 hours ago

Sorry if my title didn’t communicate that clearly but I do agree!

[–] wpb@lemmy.world 27 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (3 children)

This is not AI, this was illustrated by a human being called Hugh Syme, whose work just looks like this. And it's looked like this for ages, since well before gen AI. This is crappy ragebait.

[–] zachpieces@piefed.world 25 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago) (1 children)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugh_Syme#Controversy_and_criticism

Re: his 2025 Dream Theater album art from that band’s drummer

[–] hexagonwin@lemmy.today 3 points 9 hours ago

if this is true, the title should be edited..

[–] tomiant@piefed.social 15 points 23 hours ago (2 children)

Syme is who misunderstood the kid gloves reference then?

[–] Crashumbc@lemmy.world 1 points 7 hours ago

Possibly?

TBH, I've never really thought about the reference much. But if someone asked me yesterday before I read another comment on this thread explaining it ..

I very well may have guessed a kid wearing gloves.

[–] tigeruppercut@lemmy.zip 2 points 9 hours ago

Could just be a different interpretation. Like not all gloves are boxing gloves, yet no one's mentioning that. Plus they're brown in the picture, so maybe they're made out of goat leather anyway.

If it's not AI I don't think there's much valid criticism of an artist not using every phrase literally.

[–] lol_idk@piefed.social 53 points 1 day ago (6 children)

Why should I bother watching something you couldn't be bothered to create?

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] Klanky@sopuli.xyz 73 points 1 day ago (5 children)

I don’t understand when someone who is creative in one field uses AI to generate something in another field. Like, how would Rush feel if some visual artist used AI to make crummy knock-off Rush songs with their own art?

[–] zachpieces@piefed.world 36 points 1 day ago (9 children)

In most cases, I expect that moves like this are by the record company/rightsholders/whoever as a cheap cash-grab rather than the artist themselves. Peter Gabriel is a vocal exception to that.

[–] Klanky@sopuli.xyz 13 points 1 day ago

That may be true in this case, I'm thinking more of small content creators on YouTube or elsewhere. No class solidarity.

[–] bridgeenjoyer@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Oh no is peter pro AI... Damn it I loved him

[–] ChickenLadyLovesLife@lemmy.world 3 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago) (1 children)

His recent album I/0 had a bunch of AI videos which is whatever (I found them just kind of disturbing to look at and couldn't do it more than once). But after listening to the album a number of times (I've been a huge Peter Gabriel fan since "Solsbury Hill" came out) I'm inclined to think that album's music was AI-generated as well. All the songs are just a weird blending of his various styles from earlier albums and they don't seem to be the logical or normal product of an artist his age.

[–] zachpieces@piefed.world 2 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

I don’t think i/o (or o/i) had AI generated music. A number of the songs had been works-in-progress for years since Gabriel had performed early versions of them live in concert prior. In his full moon updates for each song, there is sometimes footage of the performers in the studio with instruments and even an orchestra or choir at times. I remember specifically he cited Brian Eno’s “electric worms” synths for the fifth track. There had also been a substantial time gap since Gabriel put out his previous album, and he notably likes to mix genres, including world music. If any artist would evolve their style atypically for their age, it would be Gabriel.

[–] ChickenLadyLovesLife@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago

Well, good to know.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] MeatPilot@sh.itjust.works 20 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

I feel like I say this a lot, probably because, AI is trying to force itself into my space every day. Anyhow, As a graphic designer...

I agree 100% that just because it's not your expertise doesn't make it better. I butt up against the need to use music and copy. I don't write and I can't compose music. I'm very conscious to not use AI for either. I just had to grab a 6 sec jingle for a podcast intro to accompany my graphics. I had the option to use AI from a stock music website, but I bought it from a human instead. Kind of sickening they even allow AI junk to be mixed in with human created content and make people pay for it.

Regardless how easy it is to do so, their is always something missing. That human touch. I have to explain it more and more and I'm holding to my guns. No AI in the creative spaces, no exceptions.

My biggest take on it, even if someday it does a better job. What are we saying as a society? That we'd rather give up our creativity and do the menial tasks instead? AI should be handing the boring repetitive tasks, not be the one doing the higher level art, that's just fucked. Where do people think that AI got it's ideas from, it stole it from us! Everything I put out is a piece of me, to have something gobble that up and regurgitate it is beyond offensive.

I don't know, I feel like I'm losing. Probably going to switch careers when I move on to my next gig. Before this their was always extremely low respect for what I do. Now I think no one cares they are putting out garbage, they just want to skip quality for quantity.

[–] Banana@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

AI, by its very nature, is incapable of capturing the human condition.

No matter how extensive its datasets, this will never change. This is because the human condition is just that, flawed and twisted and emotional, in all the ways humans are, and all the ways programs fundamentally cannot be.

A computer program's only goal is to do what it is programmed to do perfectly. An issue arises when it tries to copy, or augment the human condition perfectly.

How can you perfectly augment something that is, by its very nature, unpredictably imperfect?

This is why AI created "art" is so uncanny and soulless; you cannot augment the human condition.

[–] Zos_Kia@jlai.lu 3 points 9 hours ago

I think there's also the notion that people won't invest emotional time for nothing. It has to be part of a larger transaction with a human being. Even if the transaction is extremely lopsided, as in "I love Taylor swift but she doesn't know I exist", it still has to have a human recipient.

A good analogy is psychotherapy. 99% of the work is done by the patient, but it just doesn't work without the other human. The process absolutely requires an ape to meet with another ape for anything to happen. It would work better with an untrained psychologist, than with the best fine tuned "almost-AGI" model. It's not about performance it's really existential. The concept of therapy doesn't do anything for your brain just like the concept of a strawberry doesn't do anything for your mouth.

Just like the concept of a rock song or a painting doesn't do anything for your soul.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] als@lemmy.blahaj.zone 41 points 1 day ago (3 children)

I don't think Neil would approve of this.

[–] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 14 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Neil Peart was big into Ayn Rand. He would completely support this.

[–] bridgeenjoyer@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Only early on, like a lot of young men. He learned and grew like intelligent people do and realized her stories are just stories.

[–] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Nope. He stayed die hard Ayn Rand:

Nearly two decades later, in a 2015 Rolling Stone interview, Peart reaffirmed this worldview, calling himself a “bleeding-heart libertarian”

https://www.thetapesarchive.com/the-evolving-mind-of-neil-peart/

[–] dreadbeef@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

moving from Rand’s stark individualism to what he later called “bleeding heart libertarianism.”

Do you know what 'bleeding heart' means? From your understanding, what is the difference between bleeding heart libertarianism and rand's stark individualist libertarianism? This quote means he was not in favor of Rand's stark individualism and instead favored bleeding heart libertarianism. Why don't you read it that way? Why do you describe Ayn Rand as a 'bleeding heart libertarian'?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] teft@piefed.social 6 points 1 day ago

Neil Peart stands alone.

[–] zachpieces@piefed.world 9 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Neil is proverbially rolling in his grave (I can’t determine if he was cremated or not)

[–] deadbeef79000@lemmy.nz 32 points 1 day ago (1 children)

TIL the origin of "kid gloves"

[–] zachpieces@piefed.world 30 points 1 day ago

The origin is one thing, but even a cursory read of lyrics reveals the meaning, which the music video misses

[–] bridgeenjoyer@sh.itjust.works 14 points 1 day ago* (last edited 20 hours ago)

Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

I really hope it was some clueless person at the label and not the choice of Ged and Alex

[–] MutantTailThing@lemmy.world 29 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The irony about all this AI bullfuck is that there is nothing even remotely intelligent about it.

[–] masta_chief@sh.itjust.works 1 points 23 hours ago

Fake intelligence

[–] thesohoriots@lemmy.world 18 points 1 day ago

“Begin the day with an LLM, a companion sycophantic”

[–] Rebels_Droppin@lemmy.world 15 points 1 day ago

:(

[–] etherphon@piefed.world 14 points 1 day ago

Closer to the Heart has been on heavy rotation lately. Message of the song is as poignant as ever.

[–] demlet@lemmy.world 9 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Ugh, the faces are so creepy.

[–] bcgm3@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Ironically, it's a great visual metaphor for this decision to use AI to generate music videos, since that facial expression looks like someone who only just realized they've shit their pants.

load more comments
view more: next ›