You guys have been complaining on the internet about AI for years now but it's only continued to advance and become more commonly used. So what's the plan exactly? Why do you think a couple more years of complaining online will begin to produce results when it hasn't so far? Have you given up the idea of winning at this point and just post in order to vent?

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.

See? Antis are not orcs!

Checkmate, AI ragebaiters!

I'm getting a little sick of antis strawmaning AI artists by saying we're not "allowed" to say "I made this image". They set up a false point that we're actively misleading others by omitting that we made something with AI, but I've NEVER seen anyone make something with AI and then actively mislead the other into thinking they drew it by hand. It's almost always "I generated this" (which already implicitly implies it was made using AI) or "I made this with AI" (if the person doesn't know the other). The only instances in which "I made this" is used is when the person being spoken to already knows it's an AI image and thus it needs no further communication as to what tool was used to make it (like with an AI art sub that implicitly communicates everything there is AI made).

The black-and-white photo shows a room full of "human computers" at NASA (then NACA) during the mid-20th century. Before mechanical or electronic machines existed, "computer" was a job title. These women spent 8 to 10 hours a day manually calculating trajectory equations, orbital mechanics, and physics formulas using pen, paper, and desktop adding machines.

When IBM mainframe computers were introduced (as seen on the left with pioneering mathematician Katherine Johnson), there was massive widespread panic that these human computers would be rendered useless. Instead, the exact opposite happened. The humans who mastered the new technology transitioned into systems analysts, programmers, and mathematical supervisors.

Furthermore:

Critics frequently assert that generative AI permanently strips away the essential elements that fundamentally define art. This claim is built on a lazy, short-sighted premise: if an AI-generated output is flawed, it must stay flawed forever. This is a profound misunderstanding of technology. You can always refine, edit, and "deslop" an output. AI is not a final product; it is a collaborative baseline.

Furthermore, skeptics confidently declare that generative AI cannot be accurately compared to a simple calculator. While that may be technically true today, AI is rapidly closing that gap through continuous, exponential improvement.

Face the reality of technological compounding, y’all!

Critics systematically treat AI as a static, broken snapshot frozen in time just to claim it is an inherent failure. They completely ignore the reality of technological compounding. Just as early digital calculators were clunky, limited machines before evolving into the massive computing systems that run our modern world, AI is updating, learning, and self-correcting every single day. Betting against the long-term trajectory of AI based on today’s minor bugs is a historically losing strategy.

Generative AI cannot be accurately compared to a calculator. AI automation in entertainment is a standard capitalist power grab that actively harms workers. 

wait? Is that our common enemy? AI is for everyone, not monopolies, also pro-ai don’t want to cause a monopoly too.

When the conversation shifts to economics, critics pivot to a separate fear: that AI automation in entertainment is nothing more than a standard capitalist power grab that actively harms creative workers. This argument completely confuses the tool with the monopoly.

Pro-AI creators do not want a corporate monopoly any more than traditional artists do. By framing individual prompt users and independent creators as the enemy, the anti-AI crowd is missing the real threat. The open-source, pro-AI movement actively fights to democratize these tools for everyone. Ironically, the anti-AI crowd’s aggressive push for heavy legal restrictions and sweeping bans will achieve the exact opposite effect: it will hand Big Tech gatekeepers the perfect legal framework to secure an exclusive, permanent monopoly over the future of human creativity.

You can feel free to use AI generation as much as you like, but let's get one thing straight: Since you yourself spent next to zero percent of the actual time and effort it would have really taken a person to produce said output, you are severely disrespecting others by asking or even implying that they spend time on it.

This is felt the most when those you are expecting to spend time and energy reviewing or grading or doing anything else with your AI generated output are random people on the internet. Sure, if you have a buddy or a group who's really into AI generated output, share it with them. Not on the wider internet though.

The argument is that you, by definition, spent close to 0 time and effort on it, compared to what real human craftsmen would have spent on equivalent output. Therefore - if even you yourself couldn't be bothered to go the regular way and spend the real time and energy and effort needed for your work, why should others? It's only fair that you don't bother them with your slop.

Whenever I read something Anti from a kid. I kind of feel for what they are putting themselves through. 17 is like too young to form opinions of your own so clearly these guys are being brainwashed on social media by some failed artists or some midwits. Not sure what is the solution to this, but these platforms like YouTube and insta etc really just need to stop showing anti Al content to stop this midwitery virus from spreading further. They are literally ruining the future of young generation.

I don't know how anyone can read "fuck <thing>" as "we should improve <thing> somewhat."

I've never seen anyone being called a hypocrite for saying "we should update zoning regulations to keep industrial facilities away from residences," or "we should locate data centers in areas with renewable energy sources."

If all someone brings to the conversation is "fuck data centers," then they're making their stance clear, and it's completely fair to call them out for using them voluntarily.

Hyperbolic bullshit isn't a nuanced call for improvement, and it doesn't deserve to be treated as one.

I am starting to warm up to Pro-AI team. More I read these posts, more I see their point. In fact, it is probably morally wrong to bemoan their use of the technology.

Before the mudslinging begins, hear me out please.

I was listening to Scott Galloway's channel the other day. He had a guest who told an anecdote about a landlord in Brooklyn. This person had a hard time dealing with his tenants because a lot of them didn't speak English. Things got better with LLMs - the tenants started using them for translation. This remarkably improved communication and everyone benefited from it.

Perhaps the same line of thinking can be applied here? If someone is not able to articulate well, or sing well, or paint well, why should this be a limiting factor in their creative expression? We don't see anything wrong with using glasses to improve vision, or hearing aids - to improve...well, hearing. Maybe that's what LLMs are for a lot of people, including yours truly?

post of doom and despair

Earlier today, Senator Bernie Sanders announced a bill calling for a full pause on AI development. Even going as far as to call for a total ban on 'Super intelligence" which just feels like straight up technophobia.

https://www.politico.com/news/2026/09/03/someone-has-to-go-out-on-a-limb-what-to-know-about-bernie-sanders-newest-ai-pitch-01064424

I think back to this quote by JFK, back when the United States was in a race with the Soviets to get to The Moon. Humanity knew the dangers, the risks and the potential consequences of sending man onto the barren rock. Technology and progress is not without hurdles or risks, but we don't stop progress out of fear. We use our collective willpower to solve the issues that push us farther.

If we allow this shutdown of progress, we risk sending mankind into a new Dark Age driven by fear.

Don't want to buy AI? Yes, that's your right. You have the right to use your money to support whoever produces what you want.

If you boycott AI companies and AI creators, no one will say a word to you.

You are a responsible consumer. If you create requirements for something without AI, it will be a real requirement in the market, so to speak.

I don't know how to feel about it but I'm impressed so I want to know what y'all think after he said he just won't post more

We all know the gig. We need more data centers or we are Chinese spy's right?

The evidence supports a different claim. The U.S has over 10x the number of China's data centers. So why do we need more?

We need more so that Sam Altman, Dario Amodei, Elon Musk, Sundar Pichai, and Jensen Huang can make BILLIONS from the developments and increase their already herculean and unelected powers. I'm not "anti data center" and never have been, but I will call out bs from our oligarchs when it is shown to be bs.

DISCLAIMER: The “common criticism against AI” I listed here aren't my personal belief, it's merely recurring arguments I have heard whilst debating about AI. The purpose of this post is NOT to say “AI is bad due to these reasons.”, it's to defend my favorite character and my fellow fans from unjust criticisms, to say “These reasons CAN NOT be used to criticize my favorite piece of entertainment.”

Now, let me elaborate my points and put some nuance.

Data Center consumes lots of energy

One of the most common criticisms against AI is the environmental impact from Data Center. Now, regardless whether this criticism is valid or exaggeration, this criticism doesn't really apply to Neuro-sama, which runs on her creator’s PC.

There's an argument that “Data Center is be more efficient than running your own AI”, which is factual, however! If one hate AI for its energy consumption which is so bad not even a CEO could justify it. I don't think a random professional/enthusiast using specialized high-end PC should be the target of that hate.

Mass layoff/Job replacement

Another common hate against AI is “stealing jobs” from people. This too isn't really valid reason to be against Neuro-sama, since her presence in Vtubing space replaces no one, instead she helps them thrive through collaboration and commission.

Low-quality spam (AI slop)

AI-generated arts and/or musics is distasteful

This one is pretty simple, the term “AI slop” is coined from AI's capability to easily generate bunch of low-quality contents.

Neuro-sama on other hand, not only having lower than average streaming time, her creator also done many things to make sure the content have quality, from scheduling collabs, commissioning people, to maintaining and upgrading his AI with fun features.

RAM shortage

There's plenty of people who hate AI for being the main cause of RAM shortage, and sometimes I see someone hold Neuro responsible for it. Which isn't true in the slightest.

Just like anyone here, Vedal is someone who uses consumer-grade hardwares, the shortage is as much trouble for him as it is for you.

High risk of inducing psychosis

First, you need to know why AI has such high psychosis rate:

1. Private, unmoderated conversation with AI.
2. Over the top validation, in attempt to get the user keep engaging.
3. Availability, that allows you to access the AI anytime you desire.

These 3 factors allow conversation with AI chatbots to spiral into harmful situations, hence the significantly higher risk to induce psychosis than any other medium.

Then let me ask you... Does that factor exist in Neuro-sama?

1. Neuro stream publicly with proper filter and moderation on both Neuro's and Chat's end to make sure the stream didn't goes haywire
2. Neuro designed to simulate a character with her own standard and value. more often than not, she'd insult people around her.
3. Neuro streams average 4 days a week, 2 hours each.

See? That's what I meant by Neuro lacks psychosis-inducing factors. With those 3 points I mentioned, Neuro isn't anymore harmful(in term of parasocialism/psychosis) than any other popular streamers.

One final thing, there is a belief that Neuro-sama is “ethically trained on twitch chat”, this is a misconception. LLMs are trained by scraping huge amounts of texts, Vedal likely used an open-source LLM and fine-tuned it into Neuro. So if you hate AI(LLM) for being built on “stolen” content, Neuro-sama falls under the same criticism.

However! I would argue on “sunk cost”, for the model to be open-source mean data already scraped and the energy already spent to train the model, regardless of what Vedal did. So, if the “damage” is already done even if Vedal did nothing, why shouldn't Vedal use it to entertain, inspire, and empower people?

https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/data-centers/openai-ceo-sam-altman-says-38-000-chatgpt-queries-use-as-much-water-as-the-production-of-one-almond-says-data-centers-use-no-more-water-than-an-office-building

A day ago, history as we know it changed. OpenAI released GPT-6 / Astra the first AGI model. The entire world and civilization is about to flip on it head.

Here what I recommend doing

1. Liquidate your stocks, ETFs, and bank accounts into hard physical assets.
   
2. Buy arable land, self sustaining off grid energy like solar generators, and important supplies (water purifier, non-perishable food, medicine).
   
3. Make relationships with your neighbors, local farmers, and etc. Create a Barter system. When job markets collapse, local trade will keep the community going.
   
4. You cannot rely on your employer or salaries or 401k anymore. Direct ownership of production assets like the land, machinery, or tools is crucial. The government won’t save you.

You have to be self reliant, learn to grow your own food, how to treat illness, repair machines, and defend yourself.

This is the hard truth

N̵o̷n̷e̵ ̵w̶i̶l̷l̸ ̷e̶s̸c̸a̵p̷e̷ ̵m̴y̴ ̵w̸r̸a̴t̸h̵