this post was submitted on 09 May 2025
396 points (93.6% liked)

furry_irl

1553 readers
144 users here now

"For the fur in u"

Welcome to Furry_irl, a community for furry memes, shitposts, and other relatable images or comics.

Community rules:

  1. Code of Conduct — Follow our instance rules.
  2. Post formatting — All titles should be a single word, followed by _irl. An emoji may substitute the underscore.
  3. Credit artists — If it's not your art, include who made it in the title or the post body. Links are appreciated, except to X/Twitter.
  4. Stay on topic — Images should contain or be related to furries. Images should be relatable or a meme. This isn't the place for general art posts.
  5. Avoid AI images — Our fandom has countless artists, please share their (or your own) labors of love instead.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Source (Bluesky)

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] MysticMushroom1776@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago)

People can have opinions about AI or dislike it, the problem is that a lot of Anti-AI people don't understand that facts must be based on and supported by reality. Something that isn't the case with this argument considering that:

  1. There are open-source volunteer run services that are in fact free, and open-source (@db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com already mentioned the AIhorde in the other thread), and to add to that...
  2. There are low power models that can run on a standard GPU and cooling, if one has a gaming PC they can run it themselves for the price and energy usage of a gaming session.

You can dislike that people use AI software, but the things you say need to align with reality otherwise it's lying and it costs you credibility. Strawman arguments and ad-homeim aren't going to fix that or make you seem more right. At the end of the day people are entitled to their own opinions. However facts rarely care about people's feelings, and in this case they don't care about yours. I await the logical fallacies that people will spit out to try and combat this.

[–] Rin@lemm.ee 16 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (10 children)

As much as i hate AI generated art, this is a shit argument. You can run an AI on your phone (which you would have anyway) without a subscription. You can also doodle on your phone for free.

[–] Jankatarch@lemmy.world 5 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

Yeah I feel it would be better if they they have shown the sheer cost of making these models and their upkeep instead.

It's perfectly fine price to use in cancer treatment. But when they mention AI girlfriends I want to scream.

[–] Rin@lemm.ee 4 points 4 days ago

It's not even the cost of training the AI. A better argument is that using AI for art is pure fucking laziness in 99.9% of cases.

Also, why have an AI waifu when you can have a real one and touch grass at the same time?

[–] Donkter@lemmy.world 3 points 4 days ago

Also if you're not an idiot you can buy a workable smart phone for 100$ if you want

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] glitchdx@lemmy.world 11 points 4 days ago

I keep seeing this kind of argument, and I understand, but I disagree.

The comparison isn't between using an ai service and doing it yourself, but rather between using an ai service and commissioning an actual artist. I can afford $20/mo for infinite mediocrity. I cannot afford $20/image (or more depending on the artist).

Of course, there is a flaw in my argument, in that I was assuming that the techbro was being honest. People aggressively pushing dalle or midjourney or whatever aren't interested in "making art accessible". They hate art and artists, and want to force creative types to be miserable doing jobs they hate. I have to remind myself that this is the kind of person that the comic is complaining about.

[–] LovableSidekick@lemmy.world 7 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Lol right, because there are no free AI art services and you need a dedicated iPhone to do AI art. OP forgot to add $400 for a leather upholstered "gaming chair".

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] sdfric88@lemmy.sdf.org 27 points 5 days ago

Hehe "borrowed"

[–] AdrianTheFrog@lemmy.world 30 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

I have a pretty quick ~$500 phone (snapdragon 8 gen 3) and tried this local AI app once (just something on fdroid, you could probably find it) but the experience was pretty terrible. Like a minute per image on the small local models from 2022. I'm sure you could do better, but my conclusion is that an $800 phone is as useful as a $60 phone for generative ai because you're going to have to use some remote service anyways.

[–] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 17 points 5 days ago (1 children)

A minute per image, on a pocket computer, sounds like Marty McFly Jr. making a three-second pizza and going "C'mon, c'mon!'

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Foxfire@pawb.social 20 points 5 days ago (10 children)

What does that phrase even mean? Asking something else to make something for you is not artistic, so it can't be that. People who commission other humans to make things aren't suddenly artists. If they literally just mean consumption of images, it's not as if web searching for images has been difficult for the last couple decades at this point. If you don't care about art at all and just want content, there are lifetimes of things you could look for readily available to indulge. Just start typing and away you go! Literally the only thing that has changed is that now you are accelerating dead internet theory and removing human interaction from what you consume. Of course, if you don't care about art that is a moot point, since human self-expression and communication never meant anything to you in the first place.

At best, the phrase should be specialized, on demand consumption of niche content is more accessible, not art.

[–] Signtist@lemm.ee 22 points 5 days ago (9 children)

Artists understand that art is primarily about self-expression. Non-artists often instead think art is about producing nice pictures. When all nice pictures come with self-expression baked in, the two groups seem to be on the same page, but when a computer makes nice pictures that are completely devoid of self-expression, we find out they're not on the same page at all.

load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[–] Ptsf@lemmy.world 16 points 5 days ago (9 children)

I wish we could start arguing about the ethics of compensation for training data and requiring a concrete way to both protect opt-out, as well as compensate those who contribute, rather than argue about a product that absolutely does have a user base (as is continually proven). I don't think there's a win against the demand, but you can win the ethics battle and force better regulations.

[–] mke@programming.dev 1 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

GenAI advocates would rather get rid of IP altogether, though. They claim they're all running ethical models already and it's perfect, but they also want artists' right to opt-out to not exist. Nevermind compensation, or the need for opt-in, we can't even agree on the importance of consent.

[–] Ptsf@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago

And robocallers/spam callers would rather get rid of bans on automated call systems and enforcement of Do Not Call lists. Doesn't mean we have to do what they want, and it would be an extremely ineffective argument to argue for a ban on phones or even just a ban on automated call systems connected to phones. Both are tools with extremely legitimate use cases that can and have been exploited for malicious and unethical means. Welcome to the complexity of modern living. I see you as an ally, but I warn that we'll need to be specific in our language and our desires in order to shape the discussion properly, else you'll just end up categorized with the "nutjobs wanting to ban phones" (embellished simile I'm using to give you an example in a different context) and you're going to lose a lot of momentum from the legitimately ethical people who are on your side.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone 16 points 5 days ago (2 children)

If what you need is a constant stream of ever-changing imagery that you don’t glance at for more than a second or two before moving on, I’m sure AI is great for that. So are jangling keys and those slime ASMR videos. But if that’s what you want from viewing or making art, you are an alien to me.

[–] agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works 11 points 5 days ago (20 children)

I use it for illustrations of characters, items, and locations for my homebrew TTRPG campaign. That's basically exactly what happens: party looks at it once, gets a general idea, and usually never looks at it again. Without AI, I just wouldn't have the illustrations; I'm not commissioning art that's going to get looked at once.

I wouldn't call that "art", in any real sense. They're visual aids, not aesthetic masterpieces.

load more comments (20 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›