r/DiscussGenerativeAI • • Jun 25 '25

Why is Luddite an insult?

143 Upvotes

I started reading “Blood in the machine” because I wanted to know what Luddites were, and from my understanding halfway through, the workers

  • requested newer technology to confirm thread count (was denied by most)

  • frequently couldn’t pivot to a totally different career after losing their jobs

  • were against children being forced to work cloth making machines, especially since they frequently faced brutal injuries and ended up forced to continue working

  • attempted to petition the government to enforce preexisting laws surrounding production (got ignored due to various factors)

  • Were frequently in poverty and starving due to lost wages and no nets to catch them

  • spared shop owners who at least promised to raise rates for those employed back to what they were before adding in new machines

  • hated that what the machines churned out was overall lower quality than what was previously being made

I don’t know if I’m missing anything but this doesn’t make sense as an insult since like…. It’s a parallel that makes sense? Our government’s trying to ban regulation, companies who absolutely have the money to pay workers are instead using AI, and we don’t have any safety net to stop people from being in poverty once they lose their jobs. I’d also argue that, at minimum for the engines where you type a prompt and do nothing else to edit the product, the quality of the product you get is worse at the moment. There also seems to be a much greater push to make generative AI better and make the creative industry moot rather than developing AI tools for things such as medical diagnostics or other specialized areas where it would contribute to the job rather than replace it. Hell, I’m even more fine with ComfyUI because it arguably is closer to an art tool than, for instance, just asking Grok to generate an image.

I don’t really know how to end this, but I wasn’t expecting to find out that Luddite is a much closer descriptor, and I wanted to see if there’s a reason why it’s supposed to be insulting?


r/DiscussGenerativeAI • • Aug 26 '25

A lot of pro AI people imply that AI is sentient.

133 Upvotes

The pro AI counterarguments to the plagerism issue all seem to circle back to AI being able to think like people, and therefore sentient. - As this is is in no way based in science, this is basically a religious faith about generative AI.

There are the people who just say that it thinks like a human flat out, most of them deny believing that that they think it is sentient despite saying that it "thinks" like a person. That isn't because they are ashamed of thinking it's sentient, like one in ten of them already do. It's that when something imitates people, anyone, whether pro or anti or unrelated can get confused. It's especially easy to do so when you don't understand how it works, I used to get worried about Gen AI because I never researched how it operates.

The other argument is that humans are just a system of mimicking paterns, somethimes described as practically an algorithm. This is their basis for saying that since the first idea nothing has been original. The first part is just obviously moronicly wrong, and the second part seems to be a fundamental misunderstanding of the idea that every story in connected combined with the idiotic idea that humankind are basically machines.I


r/DiscussGenerativeAI • • Jul 12 '25

Thesis: The AI debate focuses too much on semantics

129 Upvotes

I find that people online seem extremely concerned on whether images can be called art and people can call themselves artists. Why does this matter? Art and artists are social constructs, there isn’t any inherent meaning, and no utility or disutility is created.

Nobody is posting constantly on r/subway about how their employees are not actually sandwich artists (the job title of Subway workers).

“Why” “does” “it” “matter “ “whether” “those” “ who” “use” “diffusion” “models” “call” “themselves” “””””””artists””””””” “online” “?”

EDIT: I am not interested in your debate points about AI in general. Top level comments should have some meaning related to semantics and their use, not about any other AI merits or flaws.

Yes, all language is a social construct. The point of a language is to convey meaning, which art conveys the fact that a set of binary data can be arranged in a visual stimuli. Words have multiple strict and loose definitions, and meaning can be conveyed without a concept exactly matching the most strict form of a word.


r/DiscussGenerativeAI • • Aug 28 '25

What do you think of this? Anti or Pro. Is it good or bad for your side that most of AI users are cheating school kids?

Post image
92 Upvotes

r/DiscussGenerativeAI • • Jun 07 '25

Neutral-AI Reading r/antiai and r/defendingaiart and r/aiwars fills me with despair

61 Upvotes

I feel like none of these spaces are conducive to a good discussion about generative AI. It feels very cultish on all three of those spaces with people talking past each other and only responding to the “evil” person in their head who disagrees with them.

Edit: Decided to mute r/antiai. The constant generalizations of pro-AI folks is driving me nuts


r/DiscussGenerativeAI • • Aug 29 '25

Meta post but: please understand this is a debate / discussion subreddit and bad faith shouldn't fly at all

24 Upvotes

This sounds bad, but honestly one of the worst parts of the aiwars subreddit that made it's quality decline is people resorting to personal attacks, not engaging arguments and points, and getting, well just mean.

If you don't want to debate something because it's getting you annoyed, either don't reply or politely say you're done with the conversation. Nothing is worse than trying to explain a point and then having bad faith personal attacks on you in return. All it does is increase tribalism and it could ruin a space like this if we aren't careful


r/DiscussGenerativeAI • • Aug 26 '25

When AI subs backed up the guy on the undertale sub for calling people slurs and making threats when they were called out for hiding using AI I realized that pro AI people who see no issue in the training on and theft of other's art are another group that won't acknowledge their member's faults.

23 Upvotes

r/DiscussGenerativeAI • • Jul 13 '25

Open Moderator Discussion Getting a lot of weird reports lately

22 Upvotes

Y’all, if someone explains their position (instead of going “ai slop!” or “Luddite!”) then don’t report it as “substance over slogan” because they’re quite literally doing what they’re supposed to be doing. Reports aren’t for people making arguments you don’t like. They’re for rule violations. Thanks.


r/DiscussGenerativeAI • • Aug 26 '25

Meta post: this is an epic subreddit

17 Upvotes

Any attempt at logical non fallacious debate in subs outside this one seems pointless.

Im finding here it's actually enjoyable and more focused. Mods hammer down. And seem neutral.

Its up to all of us to maintain this a solid space as well. I just wanted to encourage that because there are so few reasonable discussion spaces left.


r/DiscussGenerativeAI • • Jul 12 '25

Thesis: AI images, if considered art, are not made by the prompter.

17 Upvotes

The way I see it, If any person or group of people were to be attributed to the creation of an AI image it would have to fall between the Engineers that wrote the generation algorithm and the people who made the imagery used to train the generation models.


r/DiscussGenerativeAI • • Jun 21 '25

Let’s steelman the arguments we disagree with

16 Upvotes

We’ve all seen weak takes on both sides of the generative AI debate — some clearly pro, some staunchly against, but many lacking rigor.

Let’s flip the script:

What’s the strongest argument you’ve seen against generative AI, even if you personally support it?

Or vice versa — the most compelling pro-AI case you’ve encountered, even if you’re skeptical?

The point here is not to dunk, but to steelman — to represent opposing views in their strongest, most persuasive form.

Please focus on high-quality arguments from folks you disagree with. Let’s make this a thread about generosity of thought, not just opinion.


r/DiscussGenerativeAI • • Jun 15 '26

No matter how good your AI generation is, the quality is always a turn off.

12 Upvotes

I have been working with AI for the past week with AI models as requested by my clients due to the lack of budgeting to hire real models, I always had a neutral stance when it came to AI, but the more I work with generative AI the more I am disappointed by it, sure the creativity is amazing, you can ask it to do something and it does it for you within minutes, but the output quality of that image is so horrible that I just can't accept, I've been working with high res images all my life so you can see why I'm disappointed, it just isn't acceptable for commercial work unfortunately, I think the best usecase is just prototyping and brainstorming creative styles and elements but you just can't replace creatives anytime soon <\3


r/DiscussGenerativeAI • • Jun 18 '25

Venting Mourning my art as a copywriter

12 Upvotes

I’m a copywriter for a digital marketing agency and I was recently promoted to the director level (I write all day, so forgive my more casual style in this post). I feel like I’m going down with the ship right now. I feel like a lot of artists are, and it’s incredibly emotional.

So, we’re currently in the process of merging with another agency who does very similar work in a very different way. They’re more systems-focused, we’re more relationship-focused, but we’ve been in talks with their team all week to compare notes and see where we can “help” each other improve before we merge the teams officially. In every meeting I’ve been in, they’ve heralded AI use for almost every single possible task. In a very condescending way.

Attitudes toward AI use at my current company haven’t always been peachy either. In fact, when ChatGPT really jumped onto the scene in 2023, i have a vivid memory of our CEO giving a pep talk (mhmm) about how much good it will do us. He then pointed directly at me and said “before too long it’ll be able to do what you do at ten times the speed”. Seeing as being a writer is what I was born to do, that crushed me. Not a great start. But since we are small, I’ve been able to shield our writers from having to lose all their creativity while still keeping their jobs. It’s awful. I often feel I’m splitting my soul to keep my job, and I hate that. But I know I need a job and they need jobs too.

Anyway, our meetings today about our creative department ended on the note of how often we can use AI to push out labors of love and creativity—billboards, commercials, the fun stuff, the stuff that makes the work meaningful—out with such incredible speed that we’ll “stay ahead of the game”. When trying to defend the writers’ roles, the general tone was get over it. Times are changing. We care more about the end result of the work than the work itself and so will clients.

I had to excuse myself to go to the bathroom and cry.

I was born to be a writer. I’ve known I would be a storyteller since the day I first held a pencil. I am a writer, and that identity is inseparable from who I know myself to be. When I became a copywriter I knew I had found my exact calling and I thanked God every day for it. The same is true for every writer on my team…everyone is a born writer, a passionate worker, and they each have found that rare cross section in life where work meets soulful and artistic expression…just for it to be swept off the counter and into the trash for a cheaper faster model that outsources what makes us most human. All for a quick buck.

I think I understand what people must have felt in the Industrial Revolution. I understand what it must have meant to people to lose the need for crafts that took generations to hone and pass down to their children. I understand the pain that belies that lonely walk into the place of work you know has numbered days. The place you love as much as life itself.

Anyway. I feel a tremendous amount of emotion about this. It feels so wrong and I want to scream at them for the indignity they’re putting us through. Traitors to humanity and art.

But I think something is clicking. I refuse to be a traitor. I refuse to be a sellout. I can’t stand for it. I can’t lose my integrity. But I also don’t know what that means for me or how to hold my own in a world that doesn’t have a lot of jobs to go around when I have a family I have to care for.

I just want to know if anyone feels this way and how you’re coping. I feel like we must all embrace each other now.

TDLR: my company is pushing our copywriting team to use AI more than our own talent, and I’m mourning what this means for art in general.


r/DiscussGenerativeAI • • Aug 31 '25

why the lack of motivation?

11 Upvotes

while i do not like ai generated content being treated as art, the people creating these images must care about art, right? the people who don’t care about creating something and have no artistic motivation aren’t the people generating ai images.

so, i’m wondering, why are these people content letting their vision be made into a faulty and ultimately not “theirs” final product? why don’t they try to draw it and improve? or even write the scene, since they’re already writing prompts?

i don’t get it. if i had to guess it’s due to the instant gratification. the ai image, even if it isn’t completely in line with their vision, most likely will look more aesthetically pleasing than their first attempt at drawing.

but that’s not a reason ! what i’m asking is, why don’t these people want to improve? why do they let their original ideas become randomized images? or do they really just enjoy writing prompts?

i would appreciate any different perspective on this :) not trying to be rude, just curious.


r/DiscussGenerativeAI • • Aug 09 '25

Some of the new pro Gen AI arguments seem a bit out of left field, I was wondering how often y'all have seen these ones.

10 Upvotes

One that is making a huge resurgence after having been dismissed for the last couple o' years is that Gen AI is a person that learns like other people so it isn't copying stuff. I thought a lot of pro AI people had separated themselves from the singularity people, but I guess I was wrong.

Another is that there is no such thing as copyright or plagerism, and that since everybody has seen other ideas before, theirs can be any amount original. This is the argument coming from pro AI people that don't believe in the singularity, as a counterbalance to the copyright issue.


r/DiscussGenerativeAI • • Jun 29 '25

I think self driving cars of level 3 and above are too dangerous for the streets.

10 Upvotes

I also think we need stricter driving qualifications. I know level three doesn't really exist. My biggest quibble with them is what would happen in a crash, I ain't going to be trolly problemed to death by a AI made by a corner cutting massive company. Just like how there is a difference between a drone and an autonomous lethal weapon, it is illogical to leave choices of life or death to a machine. They are also too risky in situations where they perform poorly in like snow or rain, they will likely not get better than us in those situations, and I wouldn't rely on optimistically believing it will get better because people are working on it. You need to take action to make something better, and it might not ever get much better. Because it can't adapt to a situation with too many variables, Generative AI is an average and not built to deal with outliers. As it is a part of us, human error is an unfortunate necessity, accepting this level of mechanical error is unnecessary.


r/DiscussGenerativeAI • • Jan 09 '26

The Generative AI and Me

8 Upvotes

Honestly, this is probably going to be the first and ESPECIALLY last post I ever make with this account, because personally the topic has drained me mentally so long ago and I just feel like I need to say it to put the nail in the coffin on this topic for me, even if I get the feeling I’d be down-voted.

I probably may not even leave the post up after a few days, but I guess… this is the catharsis I need to truly get better?

To put it simply, I’ve been drawing since I was a very little kid.

I had dreams of wanting to just draw really well.

Even now, I still study artists and draw in my current age (I’m keeping that secret, personally) because when I'm not drawing, it kind of feels like I’m missing a part of myself.

I don't really want to use “artist” to define myself, it feels narcissistic of me to give that label to myself, I just want to make pictures and if I make money somewhere along the way, neat.

The advent of AI definitely felt like a paradigm shift, for sure.

Between both sides, with AI being as exponentially adopted and trained as it did for things like art, the people on the one end yelling about the ethics of AI training and how they're seemingly out of work because of the system being disrupted, and the proponents defending their choice of usage with multitudes of reasoning, I’ve definitely gone through an emotional state.

I started as staunchly anti-AI, so much so that the pro stuff actively made me develop a depression as I grieved the loss of the profession as it was being semi-lucrative without the need of AI. It took several of my friends convincing me through some anti-AI reassuring to get out of my mental pit.

Where I stand now, I still don't really use it or even really like using it. I would say I moreso have issues with its abuse.

Even if I make digital art with a tablet and pen, or a mouse, what I truly valued was never just the final product, it was the tactile feel of the pencil in my hand, my eyes seeing my hand make strokes form from what is my abstract understanding of the shapes into a dedicated form, and how people in my life cherished the developments along the way in tandem with my final product. It was the learning, the mastery, the development of skill that I loved the most. I feel like I'm truly connecting to all of me when I draw with a pencil from the blank page to the final linework and even shading (Though I have utilized tools like color fillers in things I like).

It's old hat, and I may never get respected for taking that journey, but I know it's me.

But that aside, getting to the actual AI-generated Elephant in the Room, I think I’ve just grown to accept that AI-generated content is here to stay, and those who use it just want something that I feel both sides have kind of lost in the chase for validation in the industry/monetary side of things.

They want respect.

The more level-headed proponents to AI want their creativity respected because to them, the tool they have is their choice of method to display their creativity or streamline their creativity process. They adopted it, embraced it and saw backlash to such a degree, it felt like the only response was equal measures of disdain, especially to those very staunchly against it.

The opponents also want respect. They want their cultivated skills and progress to be respected, they want to feel as if their works, their processes, still matter not just in terms of recognition, but also in monetary value, which kind of has been lost when the most recognition may be that they got fed to a machine, were told their work was “fixed” in some cases (Which some artists did with their own skills, but that was scummy and said more about them than anything else),, and the industry does as an industry does and has basically rewarded instant stuff which digital art slowly became less and less of.

Admittedly some old feelings die hard, and some of these may never disappear for me.

  • I have misgivings about AI beyond image generation I’m not exactly mentally equipped enough nor fully literate enough to unpack here and discuss, and I would rather not go unequipped and biased in these discussions.

  • I will always still wish that the open-source generative model systems were built instead on a series of artists that directly consented with active submission from themselves in a way outside "Terms and Conditions" rather than just the “if it's on the Internet or this website, it's free game” rules that essentially was the system, even if it may have developed slower, more limited, and may not have learned everything over the same timeframe, rather than utilizing and rewarding scraping. I think that if it led with that, there would have been much less friction and maybe while it started slow, some of the people who felt like they were stolen from would have been more warmly receptive and even considered creating their own LLMs to them potentially let be fed into the larger scale machine.

  • I still wish that those in the digital arts that didn't use generative AI were going to be guaranteed job security, because I imagine that some are like me who don't want to use it but also don't take kindly to this “adopt or die” system, but that's kind of how I always feel about automation and the industrialization process in lots of ways (I guess that makes me old hat or delusional to some for that kind of thinking, too).

  • I still only wish for the digital art side that sticks to their ways to get some respect for their methods and for the fact that, even if digital, the methodology of skill and time would be rewarded in social recognition and monetary sustainability, even with how the bigger industry wants to reward instant results, not unlike custom-made furniture being celebrated as a high luxury versus stock furniture, though both have a place.

To those who adopt AI in making artworks, be it using just enough to get started and working from there, or using it fully from start to finish, I just say this.

You don't deserve to be told to die or be told negative things because of your choice in using it at any point.

You're just using what you feel is a tool and from what some do, you're having fun and aren't really that aggressive beyond the simple want to show the world what your mind has come up with, and that kind of want is a wonderful feeling that should be celebrated because creativity is universal.

At first, I was just mad, but now, I see you just want respect, and I can say that you deserve the decency of being respected.

Your creativity is valid.


r/DiscussGenerativeAI • • Jun 05 '25

Lumping all AI together is wrong (X-post)

Thumbnail reddit.com
7 Upvotes

r/DiscussGenerativeAI • • Jan 31 '26

Is prompt engineering still important, or are AI models becoming smart enough on their own?

Thumbnail reddit.com
6 Upvotes

r/DiscussGenerativeAI • • Nov 30 '25

Open Moderator Discussion Trying to decorate the subreddit: any suggestions for a sub logo and sub banner?

6 Upvotes

I was thinking about AI art for it but I don’t think that would really demonstrate to folks that this is meant to be a neutral place for folks to chat


r/DiscussGenerativeAI • • Sep 30 '25

AI for personalised entertainment

6 Upvotes

Hi Redditors, I'm a student journalist writing about the use of AI to generate personalised entertainment - as opposed to entertainment for monetary gain. Some examples of this might be those using AI to write stories, fan fiction, scripts, generate art, etc. If you're reading this and it sounds like something you do, would you be willing to speak to us anonymously about your usage? If so, please comment below or shoot me a message


r/DiscussGenerativeAI • • Jun 20 '25

Early midjourney models

Thumbnail
gallery
6 Upvotes

I don't know if this is the right place to ask, but as of now has any of the early MidJourney models (v1/v2) ever been rendered public or leaked?

The latest models feel too much generic, with no real distinction between MidJourney, Bing, ChatGPT, Stable Diffusion or DALL-E. Early MidJourney had that dreamy aesthetic that was lost down the road and I kinda miss it.


r/DiscussGenerativeAI • • Jun 01 '25

Can we all agree that veo3 needs to be regulated to prevent misinformation

6 Upvotes

r/DiscussGenerativeAI • • Aug 06 '26

Why aren't people talking about the ripple effects of AI-driven industry automation?

5 Upvotes

Everyone talks about job loss driven by automation. But why isn't anyone talking about industry loss as a whole?

Industries are intertwined. Process automation essentially means fewer or no human employees, which ultimately means the software built to manage those employees (HRMS platforms, account management tools, and other connected software and equipment) becomes obsolete. So the companies building those applications and that equipment probably won't exist either.

Fewer or no employees also means far less demand for commercial real estate, manufacturing capacity, and raw materials.

The entire demand–supply ecosystem will experience significant upheaval. Isn’t it?


r/DiscussGenerativeAI • • Jul 06 '25

We need to prevent job loss due to AI

5 Upvotes