Journal of Other Forum Analysis (Volume II, Issue 1)

[Hap Shaughnessy]

https://www.resetera.com/threads/it-does-real-harm-to-artists-of-all-kinds-%E2%80%94-balatro-dev-localthunk-steps-in-to-resolve-ai-art-reddit-fiasco.1132632/page-2#post-136949511

User banned (permanent): Trolling. Dismissing concerns of generative AI. Prior permanent ban for bigotry that was lifted after appeal.

were those technological advancements based around mass copyright infringement and stealing like generative AI is?

fuck outta here with this pro-AI bullshit

Do you use Google? Social media? YouTube? Every single one of these technologies aggregates, summarizes, and repurposes content in ways that were once called 'theft' by traditional industries. Now they've become essential tools.

The printing press was once seen as a tool for mass copyright infringement by scribes. Photography was accused of stealing from painters. The internet was demonized for enabling piracy, yet it revolutionized content distribution. Generative AI is going through the same growing pains.

Many of the bigger AI's are trained ethically on publicly available or licensed data (e.g. Apple AI, at least Apple claims that), just like humans learn from books, art, and media around them.

This whole 'stealing' argument is a distraction. If certain companies misuse copyrighted material, that's a problem of enforcement and regulation, not an inherent flaw in generative AI itself.

People who criticize generative AI often don't seem to care whether it's ethically trained or not, they oppose it entirely, no matter how it's used. It's just about 'Fuck AI'. If their concern were truly about training ethics, they'd be asking, 'Which AI was used?' or 'Was this trained on licensed data?' instead of outright rejecting the technology.