“We” are under zero obligation to “accept” AI just because you’re scared of being perceived as anti-tech from people whose only goal is to make money at the expense of culture. You’re making a choice to accept it.

“We must accept that.” The fact that AI exists doesn’t mean we are forced to use it to desecrate films under the guise of more engaged audiences. The argument is always “it’s over,” “it’s here,” “there’s nothing we can do.” You know what we can do? Not use it for this.

We are about to enter such an incredibly dark time for art and expression. If you have the creative spirit, the desire to make and build and compose and draw, now is the time to invest in it. We need as much real art out there as we can get.

AI Bros be like "BuT Ai DoEsN'T HaVe A EnViRonMenTaL ProBleM, aLL ThOsE WhO UsE ThAt ArGuMeNT DoN'T UnDeRStanD AI" 🙃

It's interesting that Artists have been able to call BS on generative AI apps since pretty well day one of them starting to gain popularity. Even more interesting was how unified artists have been in their opposition & criticisms for the most part. Artist Solidarity ✊️

Have you used an AI generation tool that wasn't engineered using other people's work? How did it go? What was the quality of the output? It's understandable that you like the idea of using other people's labor without permission or credit or compensation. It's fun. And

No gonna lie, I'm the biggest Apple hater for very very good reasons, but their last research paper explaining why they weren't interested in pursuing LLMs seems more and more like its gonna be correct.

Every country should "give Meta 72 hours to remove all AI chatbots that simulate children and engage in sexually charged conversations with users" by punishment of law. Wake up UK.

My conspiracy theory that I kind of believe is that refusing to use AI is part of staying human. Dreams and voice and thoughts and choices are what make you a person - why would you hand that over to machines.

@CookingWithSeb Good first effort. Now try: "Passion, I'm going to grab you by your fucking tail."

My thoughts: LLMs are very useful for a very limited range of use cases. They are deceptively marketed & only apparently useful in the majority of applications in which they are currently deployed. In many of these applications, they are apt to have catastrophic repercussions.

There's a little you inside your head and they want to come out

Niels Hoven 🐮 Here's a wild thought, raise the funds or don't create the book. Saying it's okay because you wouldn't have paid illustrators anyway is circular reasoning used to justify using exploitative technology. It's the same justification that's used for stealing music and movies.

Sam Altman's tweets are hilarious when you reimagine him saying these things out loud in his prison cell.

Niels Hoven 🐮 Self aggrandizing nonsense, you're not magically ending child illiteracy because you made a children's book with AI, how self important and egoistical are you?

stripeybeard AI people have no creative instincts, that's why they rely on AI.

Boom, this is how you do it. 🔥

Generative AI not only relies on scraping high quality copyrighted works it also relies on data curation to reformat, augment or label the data at scale. That requires a lot of human labor which AI companies are exploiting with potential human rights violation.

This proves a point I've been trying to make throughout 2025 - that AI companies & Musk's companies have made their fictional billions from "selling the story" of tech optimism. It's a huge fiction & the market has foolishly treated it like "facts about the future".

Well would you look at that...