this post was submitted on 30 Jun 2025
227 points (81.8% liked)

ADHD

11505 readers
24 users here now

A casual community for people with ADHD

Values:

Acceptance, Openness, Understanding, Equality, Reciprocity.

Rules:

Encouraged:

Relevant Lemmy communities:

Autism

ADHD Memes

Bipolar Disorder

Therapy

Mental Health

Neurodivergent Life Hacks

lemmy.world/c/adhd will happily promote other ND communities as long as said communities demonstrate that they share our values.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
227
Pangolin at Work #1 (sh.itjust.works)
submitted 3 days ago* (last edited 18 hours ago) by Reverendender@sh.itjust.works to c/adhd@lemmy.world
 

EDIT: It’s honestly hard to believe how intense and personal some of the hostility in this thread is. I understand objecting to something when there is a valid concern, especially about ethics or consent. But this is something else entirely. It feels less like people are engaging with the actual work and more like they are reacting to the mere presence of AI in any form, regardless of context.

I don’t think LLMs are universally good or bad. I think they are very very bad at a large number of things, especially when people try to use them as shortcuts in places where care, originality, or expertise (or human understanding and subsequent empathy) are required. But they are also extremely effective in other use cases when used with skill, intention, and thought. That is the position I hold. It is nuanced. It does not dismiss the criticisms people have raised, but it also does not treat every use of the technology as automatically unethical or invalid.

What I did was not a random one-line prompt into a generator. I gave deliberate, specific instructions about pose, anatomy, style, and tone. I gave feedback. I adjusted the inputs. I guided it through a process that produced something unique and original. The result is not a collage of stolen images. It is not a copy of anything that has ever existed. That is important context, and it is constantly ignored in these arguments.

There is a real difference between raising concerns in good faith and launching personal attacks at people who use a tool in a considered way. The people jumping into these threads with moral outrage are not engaging in objective analysis. They are repeating talking points as if AI art is some kind of singular personal enemy. It often feels like they are reacting based on something they heard someone else say, rather than thinking critically about what is in front of them.

And this is happening in a community that is supposed to be supportive of neurodivergent people. That is the part I find most maddening. There is room here for discussion and for disagreement. But instead of debate, we get judgment, condescension, rabid hostility, and attempts to shame people for trying something different. That is not the kind of environment anyone should want to foster.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It still is today in some circles. What's your point? I can pull out random analogies out of my ass too if that's all we're doing.

[–] petrol_sniff_king@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I think it's good to impose anti n-word values on people. It makes the world better, you know?

I think so too. How does this relate to the topic at hand?