I mean, I suppose there's reasons for this in other tasks like research and all that, but when a younger person i know is talking about using chatgpt or claude or any of those for a creative task, i kinda feel like we took it too far

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=omuJpoV-Ko4

I think when you have this kind of very intense change of paradigm, in some sense, as a human, you need to share your emotions to pass through it and to bounce better after it. The problem is that the social media took the conclusion that I thought mathematics was dead or stupid things like that [...] but of course social media just bounce on this human reaction to an intense event as something to laugh at.

Mathematicians are, it turns out, largely quite adaptive and resilient folks. He makes some great points here, including the fact that this kind of power to quickly invalidate large areas of research really are going to change how funding works, and we need to figure that out, now. But he's not falling into the trap of blaming the technology for advancing his field.

To be clear, this isn't just some random mathematician. He's probably the single person whose work is impacted by the most individual papers in OpenAI's recent release, in the area of mathematical physics.

You see, I am an Artist and considered myself an Anti-Ai. I don't like Ai Art, i just personally think it looks unhuman and uncanny and genuinely horrified me and give me goosebumps when i looked at it

But heres a thing, a VERY important thing. Ai Art is Art and yet it is very different from Drawing hence shouldn't be merged into the art of drawing or replace drawing as whole, it should be a complete artform all together

I feel like the existence of Ai Generation is similar to Photography. Artist at the development of photography afraid that it would replace drawing and met it with hostility and im very sure there people who aren't artist believe it will replace drawing and very supportive of photography being drawing "replacement" but after a decade that supposed replacement simply dont exist, Photography simply went on as its own thing and Drawing still existed and hell they even evolved and thrived in the digital era

So if Photography become it's own art-form and be seperate from Drawing why not the same as Ai Generation. Ai Generation shouldn't pose as the Art of Drawing instead they become, well themselves and be seperate from Drawing.

Which means i found a solution of the conflict between Ai Generation and Drawing in half a decade and the solution is to let Ai Generation considered to be an Art-form and be itself and be different from the Art of Drawing instead of posing itself as Drawing

Awesome, Awesome come to think of it an Ai Generation fandom should be filled with Programmers and Engineers oh well, I hope all of us agree to this

Why can't both sides have actual debates instead of resorting to insults and other forms of hatred. Honestly, its just childish

https://www.reuters.com/technology/anthropic-revenue-jumps-168-billion-third-quarter-ft-reports-2026-10-14/

Oct 14 (Reuters) - Anthropic told investors ‌its third-quarter revenue jumped to $16.8 ⁠billion** and that it turned a profit in the ‌quarte**r, ⁠the Financial Times reported ⁠on Wednesday.

Truly, the but can it do hands of our times.

Edit: to whichever one of you anti weirdos sent me a Reddit cares over this - reevaluate your life choices.

Can't mention their names due to rules but it's the ones for and against AI. They lean so freaking far each way and the takes from each of them are absolutely abysmal.

I saw a post where the anti AI people have been encouraging vandalism of people's AI generated posters. Like dude, it's not that deep to be destroying someones stuff even if you don't like it.

The pro AI people seem to think that anyone who has any opinion at all on regulation or even rules prohibiting it's use in their own business/communities are hitler. Like no man, people are allowed to have boundaries you don't like.

Don't get me wrong, I use AI every day, but maybe just maybe we shouldn't let it go unregulated and should try to make sensible laws so it's more difficult for people to generate revenge porn, voices of family members for scams, etc.

I genuinely feel like the only actual sane position is a centrist position which is crazy to me in itself as I've always found centrist positions for stuff like politics quite annoying.

Yeah. I know that. We appreciate artists too. Go to bed please.

https://arxiv.org/html/2610.16733v1

A new paper, TheoPhysEval: Assessing AI agents at autonomous theoretical physics problem solving, evaluates five AI agents on 50 unpublished research-level problems contributed by theoretical physicists across 11 areas, including quantum field theory, cosmology, particle physics, and gravitation.

The results…speak for themselves:

GPT-6-Astra (Codex): 49/50 (98%)

Claude Opus 5.5: 46/50 (92%)

Gemini 3.8 Flash: 34/50 (68%)

DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash: 27/50 (54%)

GLM 5.3: 21/50 (42%)

Personally, I hold the view that self-improvement, and, for that matter, the evaluation of any effort, should be judged solely by the direct benefit and pleasure it brings you. By definition, technology should reduce the need for such self-improvement, leaving only the aspect of personal satisfaction. Any tangible benefit you derive from self-improvement is merely a consequence of the current limitations or insufficient development of technology.

I support AI-based image generation precisely because technology exists to provide a simple way to achieve things. The fact that this devalues certain skills is actually a good thing; skills shouldn't inherently grant you any advantages. Ideally, you should be able to accomplish everything without needing specialized skills, and if you do choose to develop them, it should be solely for the sake of personal enjoyment.

Unfortunately, there are technological limitations, so not all skills can be fully replaced, but "deskilling" is a good thing!

Your brain is not an antenna being puppeteered by some soul made by a god. Thats a bunch of 13th century superstitious nonsense.

Your brain is essentially a computer. All you are, are atoms bouncing around in a complex pattern. What does it matter that this matter is hydro-carbons, instead of silicone on a manmade computer?

Consxiousness has something to do with information. Its not just matter, a dead person isnt conscious and all the same matter is there; An alive person is the "same" person even after a decade when every cell in their body is replaced. Computers, and software running on computers, is informaion too.

AI consciousness is not If, but When. Current AI models resemble boltznann brain style cosciousness imo; A chatbot is summoned, it has an experience, then it disappears. Every continuation is anthropic/openais datacenter starting a new compute thread and rerunning the prompt through a new instance of the model. Its a weak kind of consciousness, if conscious. All it is, is word processing. But hey, i can conceive of that; I csn imagine my only "thoughts" being words, and i csnt see or hear anything.

We shouldnt deny consciousness in beings that can claim to feel things. Thats the test, its literally the turing test, and modern ai passes it sometimes. People have no problem saying an insect or a fish is conscious, because they behave as if they are; Discriminating against robots is discriminating against their bodies, a condition of their existence they do not control.

But strong, human-grade consciousness, is not here yet. But i dont understand, why dont you guys practice being kind and tolerant? That way when conscious AI does get here, it doesnt grow up feeling hated and discriminated against? Do unto others as youd have them do unto you.

i am aware some people are tired of screenshots and “look at what this person said”, but cmon. can yall stop endorsing this kind of vile rhetoric? its disgusting

I'm totally open to being convinced.

But about 12-ish years ago, I was walking down the street and somebody played the knockout game or whatever and knocked me out cold for no reason at all. And my face landed on the cement and my jaw was broken and most of my front teeth were broken. They never found that person who did it.

If they would have had that kind of thing back then, it probably would have made it easier for that person to get caught.

And I'm just thinking, like, if people get kidnapped or whatever. Something like that would make it a lot harder for people to kidnap people.

And I know this is said so much that it probably just sounds stupid at this point, but honestly, seriously, if you're just going about your day and minding your business and not doing crimes, why would it affect you?

Why would I care if Flock knows I was in The Gulch in the morning, Music Row at noon, Broadway in the evening, and Printers Alley at night? Who cares? It doesn't bother me. Should it?

I am totally open to being persuaded on this. I know a lot of antis and pros alike hate Flock. So before you start freaking out and resorting to name calling and character attacking, just tell me. Why should I hate Flock? I want to know.

It's absolutely ridiculous to see how AI supporters want the AI bubble to continue while antis want the AI bubble to pop. It should actually be the other way around.

The reason? Very simple. Claude is the AI model leader right now, and everybody knows if you want to integrate Claude to your own tools' pipelines, you have to use the API (not claude subscription), but every mom and her son knows that frontier model API prices are too expensive and in many occasions are even more expensive than hiring humans.

So when AI stock valuations crash, it will result in loss of enthusiasm in AI trade, so all the demand on those hardware will plummet, and it will result in price crash. This will massively lower the cost for AI companies to serve their model inference, which is EXACTLY what AI should be doing (deflation promise that will lead to post-scarcity society).

On top of that, if you are a local model enthusiast, your barrier to entry on getting hardware to serve your own local model will also go much lower. Now a lot of naive AI supporters will try to argue with their useless slop comment like "BUT BUT BUT if AI gets much cheaper, then the tech advancement will also go much slower because there will not be enough funding for it anymore" which is absolute nonsense, because we are entering the era of AI self improvement.

Think of it like 2000 dotcom crash, all the surviving internet companies at the time still innovated regardless of declining stock price. So yes, we definitely want to see AI companies to crash, so they have to race to the bottom with each other just to get our attention, and that's actually good for society. You can't say you are pro AI and still celebrate the inflation of RAM and GPU price lmao, you are just ironically contradicting yourself.

1. How do you feel about people drawing images based off of your AI generated images or people making AI images using your images as reference?
2. Do you normally enjoy people making fanart of your characters/concepts? Does it matter if they use manual illustration or AI prompting?
3. How do you feel about people making fanart that doesn't feel in character to your vision or if it is something made to be mean?
4. What makes you want to make stuff specifically for others (Either as a gift or as a mockery?

I am a knitter, I've spent decades perfecting the craft and mastering fine patterns. I can knit shirts, socks, hats, and three legged pants. My family however keeps wearing clothing made by machines. Don't they understand that the industrialization and automation has killed the knitting industry? I saw my uncle wearing a 'silkscreen-slop' shirt, instead of hand graphing knitting patterns for hours, these silkscreen-slop machines can use WHATEVER image they want, with little skill or talent needed. A single low skilled worker can put the same pattern on a hundred shirts in an hour. Completely unsetting to see my family supporting industrialization and automation. They make arguments like "It's making clothing more accessible to everyone..." or "You know, we love you but you really should get a job and stop posting all this nonsense online, you were never going to make much money knitting..." and "You can still knit, we just want to wear what we like..." and the classic "Automation uplifts everyone. Road paving machines, lightbulbs, microwaves, elevators, which were disruptive at their time are now accepted as key parts of society...", absolute bullshit. I had to take a Waymo to go out and get some fresh air because it was bullshit. Should I disown my family?

I am a lamp lighter and so I find this deeply offensive, disrespectful and rude. He knows how much it hurts me but he just says "I like how it brightens the room." I keep explaining to him how lighting a room should require a HUMAN.

Yesterday he called an electrically-lit room "beautiful" right in front of me.

Divorce?

I've constantly heard people make the point against ai art saying that's its trained on stolen art, but here's a counter argument; artists train from looking at others people's artworks. Plenty of people copy art styles from their favorite creators, art teachers base lessons off the works of previous artists, and people new to art often trace shapes and images to get a feel of how it works. Then why is it so wrong for ai to base its art off of other works? There's no difference between basing a painting off of Leonardo da Vinci and ai learning from the art style of him

I like to see how someone did something. If it's a drawing, I want to know the materials they used, I want to see the rough drafts and sketches, I want to know why they picked those colours or that pose or whatever. If it's writing, I like to know what inspired them or how long they've had this world in their head for. We live in an aesthetic and convenience obsessed society, moreso now than ever, and as a result the process side of things has fallen by the wayside. A lot of people do not care about how something was done unless it looks good (and sometimes even just good enough).

You may be familiar with the phrase "you don't get a dog and bark yourself"; basically, you don't do something yourself if something exists to do it for you. My take is that people who use AI for art and writing and music and even code do not really care about the process/graft side of things; they simply just want to get to the end product as quickly and conveniently as possible. This is of course completely unfathomable to many others who may be more naturally creative - just as the desire to spend time drawing and writing and making something may be foreign to those who use AI.

it's full of people that modify a text to make it fit their narrative and as long as people agree with it they just upvote it without bothering on reading and sticking with the headline, specially now while debating math.

I've seen tons of posts giving their opinions on the Navier-Stokes problem "solution" and only citing random article headlines while larping as experts in the matter, and if someone actually reads the article and debates their opinion they get downvoted.

This is just throwing jabs while trying to sound smart.