this post was submitted on 26 Sep 2025
103 points (100.0% liked)

rpg

4209 readers
55 users here now

This community is for meaningful discussions of tabletop/pen & paper RPGs

Rules (wip):

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I've been reading about the user revolt on the Twin Peaks subreddit calling for a ban on AI art. As best I can tell we don't really have people posting AI stuff here yet, but I'm wondering if it would be a good idea to ban it before it becomes a problem. I'm soliciting feedback from y'all on this, please let me know what you prefer.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Susaga@sh.itjust.works 4 points 5 days ago

How is that confusing to you? A hammer is a tool, and a hammer does not replace a carpenter. Tools do not replace creatives. Logically following, since AI is used to replace creatives, AI is not used like a tool.

How else could you use generative AI, except to generate a thing for you?

You seem to think this is a point in gen AI's favour.

You cannot kvetch about this replacing all artists forever and still insist it’s a flash in the pan.

You're right. Which is why I didn't say forever. People are using it to replace artists, and it's going to die off soon. Those are not contradictory.

It plainly serves a desirable purpose.

False. Making art is desirable. Having art is only desirable if you like the art, and AI images make me nauseous (not hyperbole). Nausea is not desirable. If you think having is better than making, you aren't a creative.

That alone makes comparisons to NFTs as spurious as those dolts insisting ‘people doubted the internet.’

People did doubt the internet. We have articles. But people also massively over-hyped the internet, leading to the dot com bubble. I think comparing a tech bubble to a tech bubble is a fair comparison, especially since it's the same people peddling a new brand of snake oil.