Random sampling of responses from twitter, methodologically worthless AI propaganda
this post was submitted on 16 May 2026
35 points (92.7% liked)
Hacker News
4866 readers
421 users here now
Posts from the RSS Feed of HackerNews.
The feed sometimes contains ads and posts that have been removed by the mod team at HN.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
The problem with AI is not the aesthetics of what it produces. AI can provide good, bad, beautiful, ugly, smart, stupid, etc. What people hate about it is not the artifact, it’s the fact that it took no talent or skill for, but is being claimed as a work of value. Monet spent his life perfecting his style, and did so with likely visual impairments. His art was never about perfection, it was about emotion and a display of what he could accomplish through his life of creativity. Goes the same, even for artists I don’t care for (I’ve always thought Jackson Pollack’s works are unpleasant). I may not like them but I can respect the effort, and dedication.
AI are has none of that. The work was done long in advance, by the vast training materials which is essentially the collective output of human creativity. Also by the people who coded the AI, figured out the math, etc. Now clowns like this fucker come along, manipulate people to prove a “point” that’s utterly pointless in the first place.
God I hate the future we’ve chosen.
I did the opposite on Reddit. r/art was cruel on one of my posts because they assumed something I had made was ai, but it was a 3D piece made to look like a water colour with procedural textures and shaders. I spent hours on those textures to get them looking pretty cool imo but the instant someone accused it of being ai everyone tore it to shreds and were dming me with hate until I got banned from the subreddit lol
So I made a new account and posted ai watercolours of bland crap and they ate that shit up. Thousands of upvotes for a sailboat even though the ropes from the sail turned into the hull. A house on a snowy hill got compliments on my stylistic choice to have the smoke from the chimney turn into the clouds, but a few critiques telling me the lighting from the window didn't lie on the trees outside correctly. Which, yeah it was clearly ai but they couldn't tell because it was "water colour". The house also got over 1k upvotes.
I posted a few more all with positive reception before I got bored with them though lol
Can we see them?
why does this please me so
Because it's pretentious people falling flat on their faces.
Because his intent is very clear. He wants to shovel slop and either be lauded for it, or have a prompt to shovel back into the slop machine with no effort. Stopping at the face does plenty there.
Because it shows the idiocy of those who blindly and vehemently opposed AI, and proves that their bias is not based in any sort of reality.
It often is based in reality, but my experience with talking to people that most of them never really consciously think about what aspects of this reality irks them. Any attempt to get people to think a bit will just anger them.
A reminder to everyone that "I don't know" is a valid answer, and that your feelings are valid. If you feel a certain way about a piece of work, then that's how you feel. You don't need to make shit up to explain it. If you do want to explain it, then actually take the time to think about it before you do.
Its definitely an interesting case study in human behavior.
Marking it as AI-generated and then laughing that people critique it is a weird bait-and-switch that preys on people taking things at face value. We've come to have baseline trust that when something is marked X, its because it is X. But that's something different.
People (IMO) don't like AI generated art because of both the lack of actual thought put into it as well as taking away from people who put their all into actually creating art that then is cribbed by AI generators.
Combine those two factors and of course you'll have people taking knee-jerk reactions. I'd be interested in seeing how many people did call out that it was a real Monet, rather than a cool person copy-pasting reactions that met the expected outcome. I tried looking at replies but only have his "gotcha" reply showing up on nitter* instances.
Also: holy shit this guy is kind of a dick on twitter in general lol
Edit: spelling
The fact is that AI has reach a point of not being identifiable as AI, but that does not mean it is beyond criticism.
Art is inherently about meaning, intent, background, humanity. An amazing art piece is rarely amazing because it is the most skillfully crafted most beautiful piece that exists (though some are)
Look at almost all famous paintings, most of them are not all that impressive when compared to what other people can create, not that they are shitty, but rarely do they actually surpass all others with beauty or skill.
And the final point is that AI art is built on theft of human art, it is the abuse of the human artistic spirit for the purpose of capitalism.
This perfectly articulates my frustration with AI. The same people who don't know the difference between art and just making images are the same people who think writing code is the same as doing software development. They seem to think that the painting itself is the final product. They completely miss the whole human experience and the connection between the artist and the audience.
AI being indistinguishable from human art isn't the point.
if humans are replaceable by AI, what's the fucking point of human civilization?
Oh, so a bunch of art nerds discovered that Monet is also a thing that you can gaslight an LLM about.
You can gaslight an LLM about literally anything.
Monet paintings are included in 'literally anything'.
Sure yeah this is a social experiment, in the sense of we get to see how art nerds relish in mockery of things they don't have respect for.
Its a fancy auto complete algorithm, that has read the entire internet.
You lied to it, and told it to tell you why something was bad. It believed your premise and then did as you asked.
If you did the reverse, it would do that too.
... Its like picking on a toddler, we've known you can gaslight LLMs for years now... did... Twitter art nerds just now figure this out?
It seems you completely misunderstood the "social experiment"?
Oh you're right!
It's worse!
Art nerds on Twitter are as easily gaslit as LLMs, and relish in mocking things they do not repsect, yes, interesting.
Not exactly groundbreaking but ok then.
I did put it in quotes lul
If he'd painted something himself and labelled it as AI that might actually have been interesting. I stead he just stole someone else's work and had that slandered. Typical AI bro behaviour.