this post was submitted on 08 Nov 2025
977 points (99.1% liked)
People Twitter
8492 readers
1688 users here now
People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.
RULES:
- Mark NSFW content.
- No doxxing people.
- Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
- No bullying or international politcs
- Be excellent to each other.
- Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major figure or a politician. Archive.is the best way.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
AI “artists” and “creators” are the absolute fucking worst. Right up there with “influencers”. They neither either artists, nor creators. The AI is doing all the work while all that their skill-less asses had to do is type up a sentence in a command prompt. Sooooo creative!
A ten year old child can do that with no foreknowledge whatsoever.
The world would be much better off without their input.
Yes, that's the idea.
Anyone can now transmit ideas through your eyeballs, and that's awesome.
They could also put in effort, and use the tool to finish a sketch they drew, or combine a render and a photograph, or simply rearrange and overwrite generated parts until it looks like what they imagined. How much labor can go into a text that communicates an idea, and still not be art?
At what point does a definition exclude Koyaanisqatsi?
My point is that it’s not art. That it is being called and considered such, is NOT awesome. It cheapens the craft that many spend their lives to perfect. And it dehumanizes the process.
Make all the slop you want. Just don’t call it art, and don’t call yourself an artist.
If I paint a landscape by hand, and generate one flower, does it stop being art?
The craft of Koyaanisqatsi was editing. People have recreated it using stock footage, as a complicated joke, and frankly the message still works. The whole original movie is an arrangement of uncoordinated b-roll. There are no actors. There is no dialog. Any individual part is almost meaningless, but the gestalt is an award-winning cultural touchstone.
My MIL paid some AI “creator” company to write a song for her husbands birthday.
Cost her $200 for a 90 second song…
Unbelievable. She could have done it herself. A child can do it.
I have used AI to 'create' art and music for entirely personal purposes. I shared some too with friends but that's the extent of it. I would never call myself an artist or musician. People who do are delusional at best.
I'm not even against the idea¹ of using it for some shitty clip art on your corporate presentation or whatever, but it has decoupled 'images' from 'art' and 'meaning'. They are not artists, they are not making art.
¹the practice, however, being ecologically devastating makes it less desirable.
A corporate can afford artist so they should hire artists, the situation is different for private people who may not have money to hire an artist or the skill to do themselves for their need
Concept applies, and you cannot get that authorized for Friday's weekly bullshit meeting.
I'm partial to this only because AI makes my head spin. In theory, it sounds fine to include generated images in your presentation, and I'd be ok with that if it weren't for your caveat about the environment.
Idk if anyone else has noticed or felt the same, but whenever I look at a few AI images per minute, my headspace and eyesight feel uncomfortable. The missing intentionality, the lack of clarity in some details, the mishmash of real-world proportions with fantasy doesn't sit right with my brain, and it makes me want to look away. It feels like mental exhaustion trying to make sense out of nonsense more often than not.
E: Here are some examples of what I'm talking about:
https://thismakesthat.com/bakery-display-ideas/
https://thismakesthat.com/cookie-display-ideas/
All of those images show items out of proportion and elements like piles of raw flour meant to enhance the aesthetics, but that totally miss the point of a professional display and ultimately betray the purpose of the article. Just look at those cookies on the wall with hangers. Who would even do that in real life without using inedible materials? It feels gross.
Its extremely uncanny and kinda stupid.
But as long as i dont focus or get interested in details, it doesnt hurt physically.
Uncanny is the word. It feels like it's going to hurt physically.
It does when i try to focus on anything!
Generate an advanced, good looking image using ComfyUI and report back how easy it was. Shit's breaking my mind and I'm good with computers.
Just to give others an idea: https://learn.thinkdiffusion.com/a-list-of-the-best-comfyui-workflows/
But then again, I'm talking about generating stuff locally.
Now figure out how to actually draw or paint it yourself using real pencils or pens on real paper, or paint on real canvas and report back how easy it is.
Just to give you and idea:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sistine_Chapel_ceiling
That's not really comparable. I never claimed drawing/painting is easier, you're hallucinating. I'm talking about the competition where generating something isn't always easy.
Generating AI content requires zero skill or talent. You haven’t proven me wrong.
I literally proved you it requires skills by providing a page of example workflows. Are you still hallucinating?
No, you provided an example of how it’s difficult for YOU. Children can learn to create AI “art” within a week.
And a talented child artist would have what impact on your argument here?
A talented child artist wouldn’t use AI.
That was not the question.
The question is irrelevant. If the child has talent, they wouldn’t use AI. Moot point.
No.
Your argument is, 'it can't be art - a child can do it.'
Can children make art? Like, the way you understand art gets made. If a kid picking up Stable Diffusion in a week proves it's never art, what is the impact of a child who paints real good after very little practice?
Is that my argument? Cool! I guess my work is done here. You go ahead and debate the point you think I’m making. It’ll save me a whole lot of time, and you get to pretend to win!
We both get something out of it!
What the fuck are you saying, if not that?
If you can't be corrected when you misread someone else's argument you're just saying words recreationally.
You seem fine to fill in all the blanks you clearly can’t understand, I’d rather you just have this conversation all on your own.
I have faith in you!
(If you run into trouble, have AI do it for you).
YOU misread MY argument, and now - being asked to please explain what you're posturing about - you're posturing harder.
Do you care about this topic or are you just trolling?
I care about the topic. I don’t care about your take on it. I said what I intended to say, I’m not here to debate it.
AI is not art. And people who use it are not artists. I don’t care that it’s complicated to you. It’s not art. Period.
End of story.
If you want to argue, please continue rewriting my point and arguing against that, but leave me out of it.
Ah, so you just spit words into the void and mock anyone who tries engaging with them.
Troll.
God forbid anyone act like you believe the things you say, in a logical manner that can be interrogated or defended. You, the protagonist of reality, have spoken. End of story, period, other cliches meaning la la la not listening.
I don't think you have an argument. You've got a conclusion, yes, but when asked to even reiterate how you got there, all you have is performative sneering.
I’m a troll because I won’t argue with you? That’s not how trolling works. And if you want further evidence I’m not trolling, I’m going to block you because frankly, I’m tired of having to explain shit to you.
Trolls wouldn’t do that.
You haven't explained shit to me yet!
You don't know what explaining shit would look like!