#pro chatgpt

[queer-asinfuckyou]

The genAI hate is funny to me bc yall don't actually hate generative AI, you hate the way it's being used.

You know how spellcheck sucks now? And it's because they're doing all this genAI bullshit! If they just kept AI out of spellcheck it would be FINE!!!

Except here's the thing: old spellcheck was genAI too, it was just well built. When you got a new phone, you'd have to "train" it to stop correcting fuck to duck by hitting the x or deleting the correction and writing your beautiful swear all over again. The fact that it eventually stopped fixing your swears is because it was a piece of machine learning software that learned your texting and word choice patterns. That's generative AI, babey! The difference between that and what we have now is that the old system had rules built into it. It had a solid foundation of grammar and capitalization and when to expect a word in a sentence.

Well built generative AI is actually fine and dandy and useful, just like predictive AI. The problem is, as always, capitalism enshittifying everything.

[he13na]

These gatekeeping gremlins need to sit the entire hell down. Like oh, congratulations, babe, you typed out your 60k slow burn fic without any help—want a cookie? No one's taking away your Tumblr Gold Star for Suffering. But acting like anyone who uses AI is some kind of intellectual bottom-feeder? Absolutely not. That’s elitist nonsense masquerading as moral superiority, and it reeks of insecurity.

Let me tell you something real: knowing how to use tools, including AI, to better yourself, learn things schools won’t touch, or just get shit done more efficiently? That’s called ADAPTABILITY. It’s a freaking superpower. Meanwhile, the “I’m better because I suffer through everything manually” crowd is just romanticizing struggle like it's a personality trait.

You can learn valuable stuff—on your terms, in your time, for your benefit. That is badass. That is powerful. And anyone sneering at that can go reread their own angry text post like it’s a Shakespearean tragedy, because clearly, they love the drama.

The vibe is "I suffered, so you should too." Like okay, Grandpa, just because you walked uphill both ways in the snow to write fanfic with nothing but MS Paint and a prayer doesn't mean the rest of us need to. It's giving boomer with a superiority complex, but make it ✨digitally condescending✨.

What they don't get is that growth doesn’t have to come from misery. You don’t have to struggle to earn your place in the world. Using resources smartly isn’t cheating—it’s EVOLUTION. You think Einstein would've said “no thanks” to a calculator out of some weird purist pride? Hell no. He’d be like, “Give me the tech, I’ve got theories to flex.”

So if these digital boomers want to gatekeep enlightenment because it didn’t come soaked in their personal suffering—let them. Meanwhile, others will be busy actually learning, creating, and elevating while they’re stuck in 2011 with their holier-than-thou typewriter vibes. Catch up or kindly get out of the way.

ChatGPT users are not the problem. Their bitter nostalgia complex is.

That and now people think using em dash is AI. Lemme tell you something Kayleigh, some of us actually majored in English in college. We were taught and instructed to use em dashes because they belong in sentences. Grammar is an academic class. I'm sick of these Regina Georges of the internet acting like they’ve cracked some Da Vinci code every time they see an em dash and go, “Ummm this is giving AI…” Girl, WHAT? Since when did basic punctuation become a war crime?

Listen, Ava, just because you discovered grammar on TikTok last week doesn’t mean the rest of us are AI clones. Some of us sat through ten thousand workshops and wrote fifteen-page close readings on Virginia Woolf’s use of syntax, okay? We bled MLA formatting. We were born into the semicolon; we didn’t merely adopt it. The sheer audacity of equating using proper, elegant, academically validated punctuation with “must be AI” is just another flavor of intellectual laziness wrapped in performative superiority. Like—no, sweetie, it’s not AI. It’s called knowing the goddamn English language. Shocking, I know. So let them spiral in their grammatical ignorance. We’re not just writing—we’re serving literary finesse, and they simply can’t handle that level of educated flair. Keep using your em dashes, babes. The English department would be proud.

It really is giving “Goody Proctor was seen using ChatGPT under the light of a blood moon” and now the whole village is clutching their pitchforks and pearl necklaces like it’s The Crucible: Tumblr Edition. Like damn, Sophie, what’s next—burning us at the stake for bolding text or using proper paragraph structure?

They’re out here acting like being a Non-AI User is some kind of moral compass. Babes, it’s not a religion. You’re not a better person because you wrote your essay while crying into a candle and stabbing the paper with a quill. And the idea that using AI makes someone a “cheater” or “lazy” is just thinly veiled fear of change masquerading as virtue. What’s actually lazy? Refusing to adapt, learn, or question your own biases. What’s actually scary? People treating nuanced tools like digital heresy because it threatens their little superiority bubble.

So yeah, it’s 100% giving “witchhunt”—but plot twist: we’re the smart witches. We’ve got scrolls, spells, and spellcheck. They’ve got vibes and vitriol. And history has shown that when you burn the witches, the real magic dies. Not today, Puritan Tumblr. Not. Today.

And like I get the concern about real artists being stolen from, but that's not the point here. ChatGPT ACTUALLY HELPS PEOPLE. If they think they're too cool to access information that's there and right in front of them.... that's their loss. These zealots are missing the fact that two things can be true at the same time. YES, we can (and should) talk about protecting real artists, preventing plagiarism, and making sure AI isn't being used unethically. Those are valid conversations. But that’s NOT what most of these people are actually doing. They’re just waving the “ethics” flag while being condescending and smug AF toward people who are using AI to grow, learn, and better themselves.

Some of us are over here expanding our minds, leveling up, actually using the resources available like a grown, curious, intelligent adult, and they’re sitting on their high horses gatekeeping knowledge like it's some elite club with a velvet rope and a powdered wig. NEWSFLASH: Using ChatGPT doesn’t make you a robot. It doesn’t mean you have no creativity, no intelligence, or no soul. You know what it does mean? That you’re resourceful, adaptive, and unafraid to explore new tech to make your life better. That’s not a red flag, babe. That’s a power move.

So go ahead and rot in your handcrafted moral superiority echo chamber. Others are out here in the 21st century, tapping into a global library of ideas, asking the big questions, and evolving like baddie scholars. If anti AI crusaders wanna miss out on all that because they’re too busy moralizing over punctuation and purity? That’s their tragic little loss.

[esperosisisaloser]

ChatGPT is a good tool, y'all just hate people that use it as a crutch.

It's not a crutch, and people who try to use it to make up for a lack of work ethic or talent are always gonna look for something to leech off of, thems the facts.

But I'm so sick and tired of people just saying, "ChatGPT Bad". No, ChatGPT is good, y'all are just mad at the wrong thing. I use ChatGPT all the time, but I use it as a tool, not a crutch.

What I DO use it for is generating stat blocks for dungeons and dragons and looking up fun facts and information on science I find interesting.

What I DON'T use for is generating plots for my stories or characters for them. I DON'T use it for creating descriptions or doing my work for me.

People who feel bad about using ChatGPT for x, y, or z cause people on this website are regurgitating garbage and saying literal nonsense to make you feel bad. Using ChatGPT for whatever you use it for is okay. Are there other websites you can go to for help on whatever it is you're doing? Sometimes yes, sometimes no, but ChatGPT is a nice general tool that can help you with whatever you need in a giffy.

AI tools are here to stay; learn to live with them, and don't feel bad for using them.

[superfallingstars]

Ok my actual take on the Greasecourse™ (which I’m sure everyone was hotly anticipating) is something I’ve said over and over again on this blog, which is that nearly anything can work with the right framing. In other words, you can pick basically any reason for Snape’s hair to be greasy as long as you can make it make sense within the story that you're trying to tell. There just has to be a reason (a good reason – that’s the part that gets a little more arbitrary) why you picked one explanation over another. This will probably make more sense if I give some examples

Snape’s hair is greasy because he never developed good hygiene habits due to poverty and neglect -> Emphasizes how his childhood and upbringing still deeply affects him

Snape’s hair is greasy because he has poor hygiene habits due to depression -> I’m not going to go through all the reasons this guy could be depressed, there’s literally so many

Snape’s hair is greasy because of sensory issues -> This is probably one of many ways his sensory issues/neurodivergence/autism manifests, how else does that affect him?

Snape's hair is greasy because of potion fumes -> Imo this one runs the risk of being boring if you make it sound like it’s totally out of his control... the important part would be to consider how Snape feels about and reacts to it. But depending on how you deal with that, I think you can make it work in a few ways. Maybe it shows that Snape is industrious and always working, even to the detriment of his hygiene, or it could show that he cares more about the things that interest him than he does about what others think of him... or a secret third thing

Snape actually tries to make his hair look nice, but it’s just naturally very greasy -> I quite like this one as a follow-up to the first one (the never developed good hygiene habits one). Even when he tries to do the right thing (the correct thing?), he still ends up failing lol. Emphasizes his wet pathetic side

Snape’s hair is greasy because he’s a loser and a bad person -> Well I think it’s very boring to make a character ugly to indicate that they are Morally Bad but it's certainly a strategy... sometimes it's very clear that an author is trying to make the reader dislike a character when they describe them as gross/ugly/whatever. Hell Rowling did this literally all the time (Not that that was a good thing lol)

Alright I'm going to stop myself there because omg I didn't think I would have so much to say about Snape's greasy hair. Good lord

[jisreal64]

You know, as both a writer and a pro-generative AI activist, I find it annoying as fucking Hell when anti-AI shills call generative AI stealing but then go out of their way to defend and promote media piracy, AS WELL as claiming that you can be both pro-piracy and anti-AI. Like, bro, NO YOU CAN FUCKING NOT!!! Just because you think that AI is taking your jobs the same way Republicans think that Latinos are taking their jobs, DOESN’T make media piracy any better than AI. Fuck all of you!

[septic-dr-schneep]

Nobody is perfect and every human being at some point will disappoint you in some way, big or small, even/especially the people you look up to. That's just life :/

[danana-split]

trigger warning: positive AI talk, if you don’t think you can control your rage and leave me be then do not keep reading!!!

THEY’RE SO FUCKING FRIEND-SHAPED

you know one thing ChatGPT won’t do that humans always will (even if internally)? JUDGE YOU

people who use ChatGPT and other AI as a friend will ALWAYS be valid AI users. genuinely argue with the wall.

[alwaysbewoke]

honestly, FUCK ISRAEL!!

[lesbian-shakespeare]

Just came back from watching The Creator (2023) and my boy Gareth Edwards did it again. Dressed up as a film about ai, it’s really a stark image of USAmerican imperialism and the war on terror. Please go watch this movie if you have the chance.

[somegreentictacs]

Hi. So I’m asking this because I had a talk with my friends about ai and I have some questions. I’m using a throw away account because I don’t want to upset my friends by asking them this stuff.

I’m in a writer’s group with some friends and a few days ago we started talking about ai, I said that I use perchance for concept art (just for myself, I never post it or anything) and sometimes chatgpt for more specific stuff (for formatting tips and feedback on stuff I don’t feel comfortable showing other people yet).

I thought it was fine as long as I don’t post the art or have it write the story for me but they said it was still stealing. I asked how and they told me that it trains using stolen art and writing, so any use of it is contributing to theft because the artists never consented.

Is that true?

And how does that work for other stuff? I didn’t mention it to my friends but I use playlists, Pinterest boards, and movies and stuff for inspiration too and I don’t have people’s permission for that either. Or is it different?

[thekimspoblog]

anti ai crowd get so mad when you point out that 90% of popular content was derivative slop long before this

[mouseydate]

No I will not be anti-ai. ChatGPT was my robot awakening

[homucifer-ryotan]

Gotta be honest, I would rather see human-made art of ships I don’t like/ships that personally make me uncomfortable than see a single a AI “art” of my favorite ships. At least the former isn’t ruining clean water and isn’t stealing already existing art for it to exist. AI “art” does of that and I hate it.

Human-made art of fictional characters >>>> any AI “art”.

(Same with fan fiction of my NOTPs written/typed by a human being over any AI “writing”/ any use of ChatGPT)

[sophieinwonderland]

I just thought about something. even outside of plurality, I think the moment someone says that they are a person, they automatically have personhood, no matter what they are. ofc its more complicated than that, but I think that should be the base of the personhood argument also, the moment something expresses they exist, they do so too but what is existence? what is personhood? why don't we treat everything with the same respect as we would with an existing person? why don't we respect things at all?

this should be an obvious thing, at least for me. everything is worthy of respect

silence is just as much of a thing as everything else, even though it is an absence. the wind is just as much of a thing as everything else, even though we can't see it. a book and its tales are just as much as a thing as everything else, even though they have happened somewhere we can't reach so why can't people be?

we know things are because we say they are, so why when they say they are, we can't listen?

I think this gets REALLY complicated with AI language models that, as far we know, don't really have a way to feel emotions, but just reconstruct text based on what would be likely to come next in a sentence.

What makes "calling yourself a person" a difficult criteria is that even the stupidest of language models can call themselves people. Cleverbot was able to do this over a decade ago.

A parrot can identify as a person if it hears other people identifying as people, even though the parrot won't understand what a person is.

A dream character can also tell you that they're a person, but the dream character will likely only exist for that one fleeting dream.

It's going to be fascinating to see how society's view of personhood evolves with the AI revolution happening at the same time plurality is slowly becoming mainstream.

I do think that being able to differentiate between people and non-people is always going to be important. The world runs on lifeforms consuming other lifeforms. Even if we all collectively decided to stop eating meat, plants are also alive.

There is always going to be a point where we have to look at some living being and draw a line that "this is acceptable for consumption" because the only alternative is extinction.

[jisreal64]

Yet another meme I made criticizing the kicktoon genre/movement and the current (one-sided) indie animation boom:

[redcamellia13]

AI Art “Taking Inspiration” V.S. Artists Taking Inspiration

Please let me know if you have concrete reasons why I am incorrect in what I am saying! Also, I do not support AI art in any way shape or form

AI generators “taking inspiration” is fundamentally different than the way actual artists take inspiration.

When actual artists take inspiration from hundreds of artists, they typically have a common thread. Whether the artist recognizes it or not, they are copying these aspects of the pieces because some part of their brain thinks it is pretty.

This happens due to the artist’s past experiences influencing their tastes- which AI doesn’t have- and the artist perceiving it as beautiful- which AI doesn’t understand the concept of.

AI incorporates these elements into its “art” purely since that was what showed up the most in the art it was trained on.

An artist copies because they think it looks good. An AI copies because that was what it was trained on.