this post was submitted on 10 May 2025
848 points (97.5% liked)

Fuck AI

2684 readers
1413 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.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Source (Bluesky)

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 hour ago

Toupee fallacy.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 hours ago

Yupp. Videos like these fit that pretty well. Unfortunate decision, since the toothbat is really useful.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 hours ago

People here would definitely feel that way.

70% of human beings? They buying the ai shit.

[–] [email protected] 27 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

I saw a job listing the other day for an “AI Advocate” (I don’t remember the specific job title). Basically the job was to promote the use of AI products to other companies. It got me thinking that their AI replacements for humans must not be very good if they need a human to promote them, otherwise the AI would be able to successfully sell itself.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

This could be said of any other job though. "I guess AI isn't that good, because it can't replace ______." Why would you assume that AI advocate should be especially easy for AI?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

AI chats are known for their overconfident persuasiveness, especially when incorrect. IIRC the job was pretty much just yapping that exact type of rhetoric.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 hours ago

In general, salespeople are still employed, as far as I know. AI hasn't been able to replace them. Perhaps AI is too gullible to the client.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago) (1 children)

AI is about increasing profits. Consumer choice is not a thing when 99% of companies follow the same profit driven incentives. Reactions like this, while good, are not going to change anything. You cant make change through consumption. You must make change through labor and labor organization.

This sub is just filled with "consumption" based solutions to the point that I feel it is almost negative in trying to fight the actual problems with AI and art.

I want to see more pro union and pro labor posts here. This "change through consumption" crap is really getting old.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

You can do both. Make informed decisions about how you spent your money, and foster unions.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 12 minutes ago

Yes. But what is this sub primarily filled with?

[–] [email protected] 7 points 7 hours ago

Hey, if you don't have much of a budget that's fine. What AI indicates is that your thing is either too shitty to photograph, or that you don't much care what it looks like.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 6 hours ago

If it looks like trash then kiss my ass

[–] [email protected] 11 points 9 hours ago (7 children)

Haha… I started an LLC on Wednesday. I had AI generate a (temporary) company logo for me.

Yesterday, I sent that logo to a real artist and asked them to re-make and improve it because I’m not planning on using AI shit.

If I can afford to spend $75 on a side hustle, any real company that I’m buying shit from better at least be doing the same.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 9 hours ago

As a graphic designer I... don't hate that AI exists for that use case. It's admittedly a pretty nice way to iterate on rough ideas for me and my clients so we can get to a common understanding. But it's only going to get them 50% of the way there as it is now and I hope that people continue to recognize that.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 hours ago

I mean, even the crappiest advertising literally makes Big Tech trillions of dollars, so unfortunately I don’t think is reality.

[–] [email protected] 67 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago)

The one and only time I've done consulting for a pharmaceutical company, I was presented with an AI generated ad for a drug. They kept asking what I liked about the image and the only acceptable response was how are you all finding ways to make medicine more impersonable than it already is

[–] [email protected] 56 points 14 hours ago

If I hear an “AI” voiceover I have the same reaction. Definitely won’t be buying anything from Dr. Squatch.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 11 hours ago

This has been my reaction for a while now. And usually, I feel like it does tend to accurately represent the thought put into a product.

When a company barely thinks about their marketing material, (the thing they often require to even make their thing seem like a purchase you "need" in the first place) and just assumes that "AI cool therefore AI good" when making their ad, then yeah, I'm going to be highly skeptical of the thought they put into their actual product.

The only time it wouldn't raise red flags for me is when it's used in more of a, I guess you could call it a transitional manner. Like in Coca Cola's "Masterpiece" ad where they mostly just used it to make the transitions between relatively different scenes look a little more natural, but it was only used for a few frames each time, rather than comprising the vast majority of the promotional material itself.

That ad required many actual talented human artists, and would not have been even physically possible with AI alone, so it evokes a different reaction in my opinion.

Of course, then Coca Cola marketing execs released their complete stock footage-looking AI slop ad a bit later, so it doesn't seem like that's a trend that'll hold up.

[–] [email protected] 25 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

When a company uses ai I put them on my blacklist, I don’t touch their slop ever again.

When people use ai I know to never interact with them, because it’s a waste of my time.

When a user online posts ai slop, I block them so their shit doesn’t show up in my feed.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago)

I used ai image gen back when it first released. I don’t post it, and I was looking for it to do something very specific that it couldn’t, and probably still can’t, do. Fish fins, for example, are a struggle when applied to humans, so mermaids end up a mess. At least back when I was using it to muse, it was a good MUSE, but horrible at making what I had in mind (I’m aphantasic, so I’m not that picky with visuals, but these suuuuucked)

I think I’m separate from what you describe, tho, because I’m using it as a muse (good proportions in different positions and stuff like that) rather than it doing the work for me? Plus being just that once; I’m not doing this actively, but it did help.

But idk, I’ve used ai image gen. I recognize I’m part of the problem, but in my defense that’s all I used it for, and never since that first muse session when ai images were -the thing of the week- where I tried to get ai to do basic things and it couldn’t so I asked for increasingly niche images and it failed at basically every mid-step

[–] [email protected] 5 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago)

Pro tip you don’t actually have to normalize this reaction because high effort media will always stand apart from low effort media, regardless of how it was created. My problem with “normalizing this reaction” is because I literally know dozens of artists who have been falsely accused of using AI generated imagery when they literally just are surrealist photo collagists and idiots automatically think that anything in that style is AI and harass actual artists for their actual work that they made with their actual hands

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 hours ago

Actually the more a company spends on advertising the more it's going to be a cheap scammy product. Have you ever bought anything off TV? I don't recommend it. $29 minimum for things that should be in a $5 misc bin at Walmart. Why? You are paying for their marketing.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 hours ago

Hard to differentiate

Better to assume they are cheaping out on the product or overcharging you if they can afford to advertise

[–] [email protected] 8 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

the problem is commoners won't notice it's AI

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 hours ago

Tested. Verified*. Obviously it depends on the quality of the output but we're already past the point where the best models, with appropriate fine tuning, are noticeably AI on first glance.

*I work in market research, this is a sample of 3 creative tests.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 13 hours ago (3 children)

Hate to tell you but you're the only one thinking that. The average consumer could not care less.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

The average consumer cares about the quality of a product as well as how affordable it is. AI...I dunno, it doesn't really make a product "look" better if it's ads or packaging or what have you, have a "meh" AI art vibe. AI art, because of its ease of generation, is vast becoming a sign of genericness.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 hours ago

Why is that a good argument? The comic doesn't say "all people will think like this" or even imply it.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 12 hours ago (2 children)

That's hyperbole. Perhaps the majority of consumers don't care, but some do.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

It's not hyperbole. I said "the average consumer", not "all consumers".

[–] [email protected] 12 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago) (2 children)

Probably referring to "you're the only one thinking that." There's at least two of us :p

But yeah, probably not most

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 hours ago

Oh. In that case, yes.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 11 hours ago

At least three

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›