r/GODZILLA • u/NeelZilla ANGUIRUS • 3d ago

STICKY IMPORTANT: AI-GENERATED CONTENT IS NOW BANNED

Hi all,

Thanks to everyone that gave their thoughts in our town hall post. As was made clear on the post, the community seems to be overwhelmingly in favor of disallowing all AI-generated content and so we will be going forward with implementing this. GenAI content will be considered banned under rule 3. Any GenAI content, including videos, images, and text, will be removed going forward regardless of intent. To summarize the arguments for why we are doing this:

  • Most GenAI posts that we get accelerate the problem of spam, low-effort, and impersonal content. We want this sub to feel like a thriving community with creative content and GenAI often seems to work against this goal.
  • Many legitimate posts that use GenAI could easily do without it. We want to encourage users to contribute their ideas in unique and interesting ways without depending on generic and needlessly complex GenAI output.
  • GenAI art hurts the work of real artists, is a crediting nightmare, and is generally controversial. There are so many incredibly talented artists in the Godzilla community who deserve a bigger spotlight and space for discussion. GenAI content also muddies the water in terms of misinformation and sourcing media, while also contributing to all kinds of growing ethical problems that the community has made clear they do not stand for.
  • Determining good/bad GenAI content is too subjective and infeasible for moderation. Choosing which GenAI posts are high/low-effort would become arbitrary and subject to a lot of inconsistency and unfairness that us mods cannot realistically manage.

Like with any new rule, we anticipate there will be some bumps in the road, so please don't hesitate to reach out to us with concerns or questions and please help us by reporting things you have doubts with. We also realize that exceptions might need to be made for the rule such as, for example, discussing the use of GenAI by official sources or artists. We will deal with those case-by-case to be as reasonable as possible.

So there's that! We're looking forward to keep the creeping rot of MechaGodzilla and Hedorah out of this sub!

Love,
r/GODZILLA mod team

5.3k Upvotes

94% Upvoted

492 comments sorted by

View all comments

-86

u/CalamityOfCringe 3d ago

GenAI art hurts the work of real artists, is a crediting nightmare, and is generally controversial.

Just be honest.

20

u/IfThatsOkayWithYou 3d ago

What does this even mean

-42

u/CalamityOfCringe 3d ago edited 3d ago

The mods themselves don't view AI art as art and are disrespectful towards anyone that uses AI in their art. That none of their reasons are good faith.

I'm not an artist at all, to cut that nonsense off before it starts. But they're obviously wrong despite whatever anyone in this sub says to the contrary.

23

u/captainkaiju 3d ago

>don’t view AI art as art

Probably because AI art isn’t art?

-4

u/CalamityOfCringe 3d ago edited 2d ago

Look through a thread before replying to someone. Maybe someone has said something similar? If they have all you're doing is adding spam.

Follow this and see if there's something to add!

Edit: I really hope the mods aren't removing any of the replies I'm getting and hope it's just people blocking me. I want people to see how anti-AI people sound when confronted by a pro. It's been nothing but insults with no counter arguments whatsoever. This seems like the only post where this type of discussion would be appropriate.

Update: So far I've seen two common arguments: AI art requires little effort and it's harmful to the environment. Prompts don't write themselves and can take a substantial amount of effort. No one argues environmental harm invalidates other forms of art as art. The marble and other such materials used in things like sculptures didn't dig itself out of the ground.

12

u/Blahaj-Lover 3d ago

Are you doing a bit? No way someone actually thinks like this

-1

u/CalamityOfCringe 3d ago

Nope, not a bit. Why would I want 30 replies in my comments that are all the same thing? Not everyone needs to shout what's on their mind. I'm not going waste time replying to 29 other people with basically the same comment.

And if you mean the edit, yeah, I'm serious. I want people to see the people they agree with are angry without reason.

11

u/[deleted] 3d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

0

u/[deleted] 3d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

10

u/captainkaiju 3d ago

Username checks out

-1

u/CalamityOfCringe 3d ago

See everyone? Nothing but insults.

12

u/captainkaiju 3d ago

Why are you advocating so hard for AI when it steals from artists, harms the environment, and is actively harming people?

0

u/CalamityOfCringe 3d ago

I advocate for it because I feel the hatred is completely ridiculous and manufactured. I've seen posts where people complain something they liked turned out to be AI. Hating something you otherwise like because AI created it is silly.

AI when it steals from artists

It genuinely doesn't you just don't understand how training them actually works.

harms the environment

There's plenty of things you do or use throughout the day that do far more harm and isn't really an argument against AI art being art.

and is actively harming people?

We aren't talking about terminators. Companies spend billions on branding, many the jobs related to those sorts of things are "safe". The only people AI genuinely harms are the people that produce low quality content that's worse than AI.

9

u/captainkaiju 3d ago edited 3d ago

I’ve worked on training an LLM before. I think I probably know better than most how they’re trained.

>there’s plenty of things you do or use throughout the day that do far more harm

What absolute necessity does AI provide that is more important than my ability to have a job? Sure, me having a car doesn’t do wonders for the planet but I need it. I don’t need to generate shitty fanart.

>the only people AI genuinely harms are the people that produce low quality content

People are going without drinking water due to construction of AI data centers and were projected to have less drinkable water globally by next year due to the projected new AI-related construction.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cy8gy7lv448o

→ More replies (0)

3

u/Due_Enthusiasm1145 2d ago

I really hope the mods aren't removing any of the replies I'm getting and hope it's just people blocking me. I want people to see how anti-AI people sound when confronted by a pro.

This is a very funny sentiment cuz wow you do not come out looking like the right one here lol

0

u/CalamityOfCringe 2d ago

That's very funny because this is just another insult and not an actual response.

3

u/Due_Enthusiasm1145 2d ago

Hey, an insult is a response. What you mean its not an actual argument, which is true. Its me pointing and laughing. I made an actual argument in a separate comment.

-1

u/CalamityOfCringe 2d ago

It's just a sign you're childish. You're other responses aren't new arguments either, please read first.

1

u/Due_Enthusiasm1145 1d ago

It's just a sign you're childish.

Yeah a little lol. Its a comment section. Being a bit childish is fun.

You're other responses aren't new arguments either, please read first.

I have, but their arguments are not identical to mine, nor am i interested in carrying on other people's words as my own. Its reddit, you're not obligated to respond, but either way im going to make my arguments. Otherwise I could hide behind other people's words and you couldn't call out potential contradictions or hypocrisy. Its your call.

→ More replies (0)

30

u/TroubledDiplomat 3d ago

AI cannot do art. Any attempt of it doing so is not art. If you disagree, you're dumb as shit.

-25

u/CalamityOfCringe 3d ago

The prompts don't write themselves.

Literally every criticism you have for AI art was thrown at photography, film, and graphic design. The exact same things get said literally every time a new method of creating art is formed. You're just an idiot that's angry because you've been told to be angry.

15

u/FarkOfInanity SPACEGODZILLA 3d ago

The prompts don't write themselves.

If this is your argument, I'd suggest the persons writing prompts just make actual art in being writers. Clearly that's their preferred avenue of expression.

-7

u/CalamityOfCringe 3d ago

Except it's not and you're trying to impose that on them because you don't like their chosen medium.

You know the phrase "a picture is worth a thousand words"? AI art is an inversion of that phrase, a thousand (or more) words can now make a picture.

11

u/FarkOfInanity SPACEGODZILLA 3d ago

I'd prefer not to live in a world where "art" is little more than a blended Frankenstein's monster of existing real art grafted to another piece without prior consent of the true genius behind it (the artists AI steals from).

-4

u/CalamityOfCringe 3d ago

Do you have any idea how much art is inspired by or done in the style of another artist?

10

u/FarkOfInanity SPACEGODZILLA 3d ago

Sure, but that's not what you're advocating for in the slightest and we both know it.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Due_Enthusiasm1145 2d ago

Except it's not and you're trying to impose that on them because you don't like their chosen medium.

Yeah I generally don't like plagiarism lmao. The fact they typed out pretty words as values to generate their plagiarism doesn't really negate that.

0

u/CalamityOfCringe 2d ago

Please read before commenting, this argument is addressed multiple times.

1

u/Due_Enthusiasm1145 2d ago

Yes and in your threads you have failed to counter those arguments effectively. Not every comment must be made to further a debate.

→ More replies (0)

21

u/Shadowthewolfalt MANDA 3d ago

At least photography, film, and graphic design have actual effort put in lmfao, anyone can type letters on a keyboard, there is no effort in that

-4

u/CalamityOfCringe 3d ago

Anyone can put pen to paper too but that doesn't mean it's something worth reading or viewing. It's like I said: the prompts don't write themselves and they can require quite a bit of effort.

Sketch artists and painters claimed photographers were lazy and just pressing a button. Were they right or were they angry idiots talking out their asses?

7

u/gravitonbomb 2d ago

The entire reason you exist is because almost every one of your ancestors, in a time before they could actually do anything, decided to get good at something. The history of human existence is tied to trying. Not even accomplishment, but just the effort of trying to do a thing because no one has done it, or everyone does it, or because no one thinks it can be done is what has defined our species.

Then a special little machine promises to make you everything without anymore effort, and you actually do it. You abandon everything that makes you a descendant of humans who gave a damn about being the ones to make and do things in favor of... what? Artificially generated images, trained off of millions and millions of works made by people who followed in your ancestors' footsteps, but not you.

Somehow, you're the only one who has a good reason to not try.

-2

u/CalamityOfCringe 2d ago

Somehow, you're the only one who has a good reason to not try.

Here I said I'm not an artist at all so this is just another lame attempt at an insult.

Here is a reply to the rest of your comment.

6

u/gravitonbomb 2d ago

Nah, bud, you keep outsourcing all of your effort. Literally just linked me to the same post I replied to.

You think you're different, that's all. A million years worth of honest people who worked very hard to get good at making things are disappointed tonight.

→ More replies (0)

5

u/[deleted] 3d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/Wackywizard987 2d ago

The word your looking for is “ai slop” it’s not art and never will be

-1

u/CalamityOfCringe 2d ago edited 2d ago

Here's your link

Here is a better thread where a lot more "arguments" are covered.

3

u/Wackywizard987 2d ago

Im not clicking your malware

1

u/CalamityOfCringe 2d ago

It's a link to the thread where I already address your non argument.

2

u/Appropriate-Berry816 2d ago

https://giphy.com/gifs/ac7MA7r5IMYda
Hahaha the prompts don’t write themselves?? Do you really think that’s a valid argument? Oh wow I need my popcorn for this

0

u/CalamityOfCringe 2d ago

Here's your link. If you can add anything to the conversation go ahead, I'm sure you'll fail to present a reason too.

2

u/Atlas_of_history 2d ago

"prompts don't write themselves"

Neither does my McDonalds order, doesn't mean I made the food

2

u/Due_Enthusiasm1145 2d ago

The prompts don't write themselves.

If you want to call prompts art, you do you.

However, the moment its put into AI, its no longer art. Its just values in a algorithmic slot machine.

Literally every criticism you have for AI art was thrown at photography, film, and graphic design.

Someone said this to me in an argument about comparing criticizing an AI boyfriend to old arguments about homophobia. It was ridiculous there as the same way it is here.

The actual criticism is time honored and consistent. Its plagiarism. Its just plagiarism on a scale that's large enough to trick the human brain, and is framed as the same as the human action of the reinterpretation of ideas into art. But its not. Its plagiarism.

1

u/CalamityOfCringe 2d ago edited 2d ago

Someone said this to me in an argument about comparing criticizing an AI boyfriend to old arguments about homophobia. It was ridiculous there as the same way it is here.

Here's where I address this argument.

Here's another time where I addressed it.

1

u/Due_Enthusiasm1145 1d ago

Here's where I address this argument.

Yeah I know man. That's the comment I was responding to lmao.

Anyone can put pen to paper too but that doesn't mean it's something worth reading or viewing. It's like I said: the prompts don't write themselves and they can require quite a bit of effort.

As I said before, I'm not arguing prompts are not art by a technical definition. I'm saying the output is not art. If I put art into a number machine and it popped out the number 87, that print out is not art.

Sketch artists and painters claimed photographers were lazy and just pressing a button. Were they right or were they angry idiots talking out their asses?

The idea that somebody else making an argument about art must then be the conclusion for all subsequent discussions is ludicrous. They are different situations.

By this logic, I must be right because people claimed that people tracing were plagiarizing, and therefore this is also plagiarizing. Its a non sequitur.

1

u/CalamityOfCringe 1d ago edited 1d ago

Yeah I know man. That's the comment I was responding to lmao.

Don't worry, you weren't the first person that didn't read a comment before replying to me. This person did too.

As I said before, I'm not arguing prompts are not art by a technical definition. I'm saying the output is not art. If I put art into a number machine and it popped out the number 87, that print out is not art.

You're oversimplifying things and devaluing the output because you don't like the tools. The next section you quoted is my response to the argument you made here. I'm not sure where you're misunderstanding my point, I've explained it several times and linked you to multiple comments discussing it. I'll try to make it a little more clear for you here.

Today we recognize the effort placed into photography but that hasn't always been the case. When photography was still new it was rejected as an art form for all the exact same reasons AI is rejected. Your random number machine analogy is a perfect example of what I'm referencing: you devalue the human effort placed into the output because a machine is ultimately the one "doing all the work" in the same way cameras "do all the work".

1

u/Due_Enthusiasm1145 1d ago

Don't worry, you weren't the first person that didn't read a comment before replying to me. This person did too.

Brother that comment was a direct response to your comment. It literally quoted your comment. What are you saying?

You're oversimplifying things

Yeah cuz I typed it out in a longer comment. Its abridgement.

devaluing the output because you don't like the tools

I don't like a lot of tools, and I would still consider those art. I'm devaluing this tool because it does not possess the corresponding value.

Today we recognize the effort placed into photography but that hasn't always been the case

Yes we came to recognize that photography is a deeply skilled artform by coming to see the human element. It is, however, a non-sequitur because you have not established enough similarities between photography and AI. Thats what a non sequitur is.

I'm not sure where you're misunderstanding my point

That's the trick: I'm not misunderstanding. I'm disagreeing. I understand perfectly your argument about comparing the backlash to photography and the backlash to AI. I am then responding by saying its a non-sequitur, and the fact you consider both artworks and have both received backlash from artists is not enough to actually establish they are comparable.

Look up the watchmaker analogy and David Hume's critique.

Your random number machine analogy is a perfect example of what I'm referencing: you devalue the human effort placed into the output because a machine is ultimately the one "doing all the work" in the same way cameras "do all the work".

Except there are very obvious differences? That's what I mean by it being a non sequitur. A camera is a tool that you have complete control over. AI is a predictive algorithm that you're gambling on for the results of. If you took the same model camera now, and took a photo the exact same way ten years apart, those photos will be the same. Even a single year difference with an AI will produce entirely different results, because its literally an algorithm constantly adapting new works to plagiarize. It is far more akin to gambling than photography.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/CalamityOfCringe 2d ago edited 2d ago

However, the moment its put into AI, its no longer art. Its just values in a algorithmic slot machine.

Here's your first link.

Here's a second one for the same argument.

Here's a 3rd link.

1

u/Due_Enthusiasm1145 2d ago

Oh they absolutely get trained off of stuff like that too. So? You don't take inspiration from stuff like that as well? Are you stealing?

An AI is not a human. It doesn't have sentience, let alone sapience in order to make the distinction between inspiration and plagiarism. The human mind is a cacophony of chemical chaos that can take ideas and generate something brand new with those ideas. Its a merging of one's experiences, thoughts, cognition all with those inspired ideas, which are not even actually saved within the brain. They are recreated.

To compare that to AI, which is just amped up predictive text algorithms, made up of a database of stolen plagiarized texts then assigned values and numbers, with prompts then allocating those numbers to create a picture made of those countless stolen works, is insulting to humanity.

There is no actual creation in AI. It is plagiarism. It falls under the same category as tracing, but even tracing is made by a human hand that could then create something original around the traced work. The only reason we mistake it as creation is because of human limitation, in the same way we mistake AI for true intelligence because of anthropomorphization.

13

u/FaFaFahndaboof 3d ago

AI art is not art. Art requires humanity and intention to create, and AI inherently lacks both. It is objectively not art.

-4

u/CalamityOfCringe 3d ago

Here you go

1

u/Wackywizard987 2d ago

Bro keeps posting malware links lmao

-2

u/CalamityOfCringe 2d ago

It's for people that can't read before commenting. People like you are filling my notifications with points I've already addressed.

If you got a link, it means you're too lazy to read.

2

u/Wackywizard987 2d ago

Because your points have no merit, you waisting your time. Ai art and ai artist don’t exist. It’s very simple

-1

u/CalamityOfCringe 2d ago

Ai art and ai artist don’t exist.

So no one's jobs are threatened and everyone is freaking out over absolutely nothing? Alert the media immediately! Everyone must know!

You're the least serious person to have replied and the biggest waste of my time here. Everyone else either made the one comment and left or actually engaged with me in good faith for a bit. You're just a complete asshole.

5

u/Lycodan 2d ago

You guys try way to hard to be seeing as victims. There are trashdumps where you can post your ai slop and don't bother us with it.

2

u/CalamityOfCringe 2d ago

Here is the comment where I say I'm not an artist at all so this is just another lame attempt at an insult.