Cuban used AI to prepare to go on Pablo Torre's podcast and made an ass out of himself, so I don't trust his evaluation of AI's capabilities.
this post was submitted on 15 Dec 2025
477 points (97.2% liked)
Fuck AI
6658 readers
1713 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
It's definitely a pathology.
To be fair, I have used AI to write the story for my Pathfinder campaign, but it usually goes something like this:
- I prompt the AI to give me some ideas
- AI spurts out some bullshit ideas
- while (mentally) debunking the AI ideas I come up with some ideas that actually work
So basically AI doesn't provide anything useful but helps getting the idea process going. Maybe that's some variation on Cunningham's Law?
This sounds similar to my usage. I ask AI to write something it gives some BS while reading that I come up with different things and use them.
load more comments
(2 replies)
I dunno, to me that just sounds like relying on AI but with extra steps.
I was hoping, praying, that just ONE of the nearly 1000 billionaires in America would take our side and deliver us from evil.
Cuban is clearly on team End Game. Fuck the rich.
Lol wut. The people who have proven with their actions consistently that they are willing to fuck everyone else over to get ahead, again and again? Would switch sides as they're about to make the winning dunk on the underclass?
Artistic mastery isn’t gatekeeping, but I understand the sentiment. It’s nice to have the ability to do rapid prototyping, but I’m against AI being used in place of craftsmanship. “The art advances but the artisan recedes.”
Was this written by an LLM?
I'm not sure, they didn't say whether I'll LOVE AI enough...
curious that every single artist i know hates this shit
Those AI folks need to see it as the journey taken, not the destination. Until that happens the AI "Art Kit" for adults will always be a balloon floating towards a pin.
Ah yes I too love it when I get results with none of the actual creative process, because the end result is all that matters
Signed a fellow human
AI is a new financial gatekeeper, we're just not paying for it yet because they're trying to get us hooked.
It's not useful enough yet. But when it's the only way to interface with the new Internet, it will be by default.
"Why use your brain when you don't have to?" Mark has had some surprisingly good takes for a billionaire but way off on this one.
All of the inadequacies and personal failures that prevented you from doing what GenAI does for you now are still there. Those things are why you were a failure before AI, and why you will be a failure after AI. The quicker you recognize that, the less time you'll spend being an obnoxious asshole and making a fool of yourself by larping as the artist you've always fantisized of being. You were nothing before, you are nothing now. Get over yourself, otherwise you will continue to be nothing until the day you die. Once you truly understand this, maybe you'll be able to fix it. Not before.
The number of gatekeepers drops because AI people are desperate to keep the ship afloat. Why worry about drowning when you have a built-in buoy, your natural brain, effort, and human perseverance?
I have issues with these LLMs but what he is saying here isn't wrong. If people can use photoshop to create art, this is fundamentally no different.
I think people mistake the llm image generators as capable of generating a final output. They are a playground and shouldn't be consider the final product anymore than amateur developers using it to write an entire program. Peole that have tried to shipping the LLM output as a final product have face the level of ridicule it deserves.
The more I see these discussions and the way everyone seemingly talked past each other, the more clear it seems these LLMs will create a measurable divide between those who can use them to improve productivity and those who refuse.
Each side of the divide will point at the other side's extremists as proof for why their side is the correct side. But as with most things, the path is somewhere down the middle.
You had me until the very end. I agree with most of what you wrote. But saying that each side points to the other side's extremists smells like a very "centrist" take. What are the "extremist" views that the ultra pro-AI people are pointing to?
smells like a very "centrist" take
I hope so! I am literally suggesting a centrist take. Don't go all in but also don't ignore its benefits.
There are a lot of people hyping it and a lot of people hating on it. There is value to them. Some over overstating it, others are understating it.
This does not mean that overstating delta is equal to the understating delta. The sentiment on LLMs isn't a bell curve.
What are the "extremist" views that the ultra pro-AI people are pointing to?
Refusing to use it to their own detriment.
Convincing others to not use it to their own detriment.
The massive issue is your first paragraph. The rest makes sense.
You should have found a different comparison. Photoshop, at least before they added Ai, was a tool that required competence and learning to use. You became better using and failing at it over time.
Llm as a bank of stolen work from great artists has its uses, like for initial concepts, which before I would do with Google images, looking at other people's works. And like that, it just requires that I know what I'm looking for, not that I have any competence nor did it teach me anything other than learning what other people do.
The radicalism is bad but it's inevitable since most people are trying to sell it as something that it is not.
Specially the employers. They don't care if I'm getting better or learning anything, but that I'm outputting something faster and costing them less. It works for them, but it's causing a great damage.
Llm as a bank of stolen work from great artists has it
This is what I'm talking about. Not all LLMs are based on stolen works. Pick the worst and pretend that's all of it.
The radicalism is bad but it's inevitable since most people are trying to sell it as something that it is not.
But we all (most of us) know what they are selling doesn't exist. We know they are full of shit.
There is no reason to bring it up for this discuss other than the glee from beating a dead horse.
They don't care if I'm getting better or learning anything, but that I'm outputting something faster and costing them less.
This is true of any shit employer. LLMs isn't the cause of this behavior.
You seem to be ignoring some stuff specific to llms, but anyway I'm curious; which graphical llm is not based in other people's work?
Perhaps stolen was a strong term, but they are all based on other people's work right? When I used it I could clearly see the styles of some artists it was trained on.
I'm curious about that but even if it's magically original to me that's is still only useful to look at someone else's work, even if is a computer work. It's not a tool in itself I can master and improve my work.
Like fluid simulation for instance. You can light and render it well, but you can't fully control it, because you're not the one making it. When I need a very specific splash for a render I need to manually model it. And then llm is even worse because it controls the whole thing by itself.
You appear to be downvoting each of my comments as I attempt to reply to your questions. Therefore I see no need to engage further with you on then topic.
Good day.
I downvoted the first one and justified why. I didn't downvote the second, but okay.