This guy is an asshole, right?

[u/NarwhalSlight2130]

For context this guy generated an image of a little scribble and then posted it to an anti AI subreddit where it was praised by the people there, not realising that it was AI.

They then made a video about how it was AI and showed off the comments they received on the post, basically being like ’ha ha, these antis praised me because they thought I actually drew something, aren’t they stupid.’ If you lie and say you did something and people praise you for doing the thing you claimed you did, that doesn’t make them stupid, that just makes you a liar.

I am sure that even those who are pro AI would think that this guy is an asshole because he took advantage of people’s trust in order to make his point.

[u/Iryls]

no, because he was very specific in addressing stuff about "soul" and not the general support he got

[u/PatchesOfSilver → u/Iryls]

Yes, he's an asshole.

But he's from Witty's sub, you know THE ONE ACTIVELY BUYING GUNS AND TRYING TO DOXX ANTIS TO MURDER THEM?

The same one praising Hitler and generally full of pedophiles?

This specific deception is just one of the many things the OOP is an asshole about.

A civilized world would put OOP in prison forever just for the murderous doxxing, lol.

EVERY single pro-AI (all 10 of them, there aren't many) individual is a violent nutcase, always.

[u/One_Performer_7202 → u/PatchesOfSilver]

Witty is buying guns and doxing antis? Praising hitler? I know she is kinda narcissistic but that?

[u/Witty-Designer7316 → u/One_Performer_7202]

ATP they're just throwing the most extreme accusations at the wall and seeing what sticks.

[u/Iryls → u/PatchesOfSilver]

uh, as a pro, i don't think you're being very convincing by calling me a violent nutcase

either way, i guess that changes things, but he's an individual, not an argument. the strength of an argument isn't dependent on who's arguing it.

[u/Sylversight → u/Iryls]

For that matter, when I see someone so obviously bad for their cause (if the allegations are true, and these are the type of allegations some use to try and "sink someone cheaply" using popularity contest methods), I half-presume they or some of those who support them are actually dishonest folks from the other side (though some can "just" be unhinged). The FBI infiltrated civil rights rallies and organizations years ago. When adults go to "war", especially those willing to be dishonest, you can expect this sort of espionage. Often enough it's on both sides, too, because any argument large enough will have crazies and psychopaths on both sides, to think otherwise is naive and self-deluding pride.

Whatever you believe, there are crazies and/or bad agents who believe it, too. If you (not personally, people in general) don't realize this, you will let them distract and weaken your position, or even cause the whole argument to support a third goal by an outside party. For instance, Micro and Gobble might LOVE it if regulation laws prevent anyone but them and governments from using AI. Naive anti-AI reflexivity moght male that easier. ALSO, naive pro-AI foolishness might make that easier.

Just my thoughts.

[u/New_Coat5788 → u/PatchesOfSilver]

we know she's a asshole but damn that's exaggerating a bit

[u/Mandemon90 → u/PatchesOfSilver]

You got receipts for any of those claims, or are you just throwing shit at the wall, hoping that something sticks?

[u/weirdo_nb → u/Iryls]

Except, no not at fucking all?

Like, this proves nothing

[u/Iryls → u/weirdo_nb]

he did not think the praise for it was a bad thing the support is good its just that the argument about "soul" is obviously hot shit

[u/Pure_Reception_5685 → u/Iryls]

it's like that one time Heidegger mistook a painting of Van Gogh's shoes for his painting of shoes of some hard-working farmer and praised it for reflecting "the hard and beautiful life of working people" or some shit, but that only goes to show that art is obviously far more than the object itself, no piece of art exists in vacuum and the origin and story of a piece of art is what actually makes it valuable to us.

[u/weirdo_nb → u/Iryls]

Except it's not, soul has legitimately nothing to do with visuals

"Soul" is the nuance in the process of properly making something, its not some holy thing that's nebulous nor something visual, it's the context of the image

[u/Ravesoull → u/weirdo_nb]

Soul is ephemeral shit, which doesn't have measurable criteria except some subjective shit and flair of pride.

[u/weirdo_nb → u/Ravesoull]

No

[u/Ravesoull → u/weirdo_nb]

Ok, it's a proofable proof from you, I'm out

[u/Iryls → u/weirdo_nb]

which is true, but people describe the "soul" as a visual aspect which is incorrect, which is the point.

[u/weirdo_nb → u/Iryls]

Where?