Chebucto Regional Softball Club

The text also being soft indicates that's a style choice. This is misusing a pejorative to turn specific criticism into general prejudice. Say 'I hate slop' and you'll get near-universal agreement, but people who *mean* 'fuck all uses of AI' are not even the majority. The pattern of retreating from 'I hate how it looks' to 'quality doesn't matter!' is straight-up pretense. It's a low-stakes opportunity to examine how language escalates tension. People in that absolute extreme position are emboldened. People merely tired of shrimp Jesus or whateverthefuck get lumped with them. All nuance is stomped out of this important new term, originally for 'uncurated spam.'

> and that ways lies a poison pill to community engagement. ... mostly due to bias-forming rhetoric like calling any generated image "slop." People had the same kneejerk attitude toward all CGI, long after CGI looked fine. At some point it's the monkey ladder experiment: self-perpetuating behavior through performative distaste. What specifically is wrong with *this* image?

Right, should've stolen a frame from a cartoon. Then the text would be funny.

Advertising shits in your brain.

"Different!" *Better?* "No."

'We bought you, you owe us money' is theft with more steps.

[So could I do magic if I trained?](https://www.threepanelsoul.com/comic/nature-v-nurture)

Your performative hatred is boring. People did the same chest-beating ingroup behaviors, whining about CGI. *Oh so artists don't need anatomy and composition? It just does tweening for you? This sucks, that's cheating, you only used a computer. It's not* real *art.* Obviously CGI is a lot better now, versus when people where declaring they'd die mad about Tin Toy. But that's the point: this tech has existed for like three years. What it does for free will be taken for granted. Nobody's impressed that Pixar movies are animated on-ones. Nobody will be impressed when movies animated without actors still look and sound real. The point is the story, the visuals, the edit - the *experience* of watching something humans put together, using whatever tools exist. Your reasons to complain will dissolve. If the complaints continue anyway, the words never mattered.

Drama that deepens prejudice. People insist it's low-quality. And if it's good, then it's robbing artists. And if you've never commissioned an artist in your life, then it's anti-environmental. And if running it locally barely warmed your video card, then it's theft. And if you'd otherwise borrow images from online... then shut up. Shut up is why it's bad. I'd understand marking it, because some people still don't recognize it. But when they do they try to un-feel whatever reaction they just had. Oh that clever idea was illustrated by a robot? Then it means nothing, lacks intent, isn't art, fnord fnord etc. The minature version of tearing posters off your wall, insisting you never liked your favorite band. Folks, the robot that draws anything isn't going anywhere. Make your peace. The software is aggressively available for local use, apparently simple enough that tech-bro douchebags can figure it out, and most damningly, was immediately adopted for pornography. It could at worst be chased underground... but it won't be. You will see people make things with this tech, when they otherwise couldn't, and at some point your distaste has to end.

*Having art* is desirable. Only self-professed haters think it's replacing much of anything, versus what I just fucking explained - it makes things that otherwise would not get made. No money is lost if there is no money.

'People say it's a tool, but they use it for the thing it does!' ... what? How else could you use generative AI, except to generate a thing for you? Most things that could be commissioned - aren't. The money is never spent. The money isn't real. No one is robbed when a robot does the thing instead, because what it's instead of, is the thing not happening. You cannot kvetch about this replacing all artists forever and still insist it's a flash in the pan. The tech works. You can run it on your own computer, to-day. It plainly serves a desirable purpose. That alone makes comparisons to NFTs as spurious as those dolts insisting 'people doubted the internet.' Any visions of this blowing over should've vanished when it became a porn faucet.

'Upvotes mean it's fine' is how you get /r/Funny with different CSS.