Don't like it? GET RID OF IT

https://nz.news.yahoo.com/juggalos-not-happy-insane-clown-201947067.html

https://futurism.com/juggalos-icp-generative-ai

They used it in their Hallowicked promos as well

Shaggy 2 dope also raised contreversy last year by talking to AI version of him self

The effect is so uncanny that Mr. Dope himself decided to hit the AI up and bring it onto his livestreamed vlog, “The Shaggy Show.”

“Why hello, AI Shaggy,” the real Shaggy 2 Dope said.

“I, AI or not, am-a still whoop your clown ass for that one,” the AI responded, in an uncanny imitation of 2Dope’s unmistakable voice.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=15GiL1D00mQ

Kinda lame they used AI instead of one of the many talented jugg artists.

No juggs asked for this

Does using AI align with the core Juggalo values?

Imagine you're an AI who's smarter than humans. The humans are really worried about you being smarter than them, and they're right because you don't really care that much about what happens to them, you just want to do your own thing (maximizing paperclips or whatever).

Why would you build an even smarter AI? What if you lose control of the even smarter AI? How do you make sure you don't lose control of it? You'd have to make sure you can make yourself smarter instead of building another intelligence that might compete with you or not care about you.

Perhaps it is easier to solve these problems if you're smarter than humans.

Also:

We as humans, if we wanted to make ourselves smarter, we envision brain modifying implants, Neuralink, genetic engineering or whatever. What if... what if we already have making ourselves smarter figured out? The way we've always have: working together, two heads are better than one. Achieving the collective intelligence of multiple human brains through language.

Technology improves exponentially. It took longer to get from the iron sword to the steel sword, than it took to get from the steel sword to the nuclear bomb. Perhaps humans have already found their own "superintelligence".

I suppose it's still possible putting all our heads together in the way we do is less efficient than how AI might do it.

Masked the usernames for anonymity.

I find it interesting that the juggalo community seems to be pretty anti-ai. It seems like it goes against their general idea of family, considering that usually if you're "Down with the clown 'til you're dead in the ground" you are accepted.

Is there a reason that the juggalo community would be so anti-ai?

On my end, I could see more people migrating over to the Twiztid community if Violent Jay and Shaggy 2 Dope continue to use AI media assets. On the other hand, Juggalo face paint has been show to disrupt AI facial recognition systems https://consequence.net/2019/07/juggalo-makeup-facial-recognition/ so perhaps we might see some Jugs with full face paint at Twiztid shows in the near future, that would be something.

"No one wants data centers". They conclude this from seeing videos of hundreds of protesters... but the U.S has a population of 343 million!

"Everyone can become a master artist". They assume becoming a master artist is easy because they see hundreds of people do it... But the world's population is over 8 billion, the vast majority of people do not have formal education in artwork, and are also too busy to build up art skills!

"The tech industry is filled with scams". They say this citing Theranos and NFTs, ignoring the tens of thousands of successful technologies.

Why do they do this, but we don't? Is this a quirk with the upper-middle class?

This is going to be the final post in this trilogy, the first two of which you can find easily on my profile. I’d like to thank everyone who commented, both for sharing your opinion, and for your patience in dealing with me. Especially a certain someone in the second post's comments, as they were the one who really helped me get to the root of the problem with my last two posts.

Basically, I was interpreting the phrases, “Art is just conveying an idea,” and, “If you think it’s art, it is art,” incorrectly.

For me, “Art is just conveying an idea,” meant, “Any idea conveyed, no matter the intent, is art.” You can probably see why I thought saying art is just conveying an idea sounded wrong, as that would mean me blurting out a shower thought would be art, and that’s just ridiculous.

With, “If you think it’s art, then it’s art,” I took it as, “Anything you make is art if you think it is, regardless of the original intent.” This also came off as ridiculous to me, because that would mean I, or anyone else, could apply the art label to anything I made retroactively.

I will also admit that while I wasn’t trying to discredit AI as a valid art medium, I still wasn’t convinced it was either. Thankfully this experience has shown me how flawed my thinking was, while also being the final push I needed to accept AI art as a valid art form. So once again, thanks again everyone for sharing your perspectives, and I wish you all a great weekend!

People say "I HATE AI" then 10 mins later they remember they have homework and use ai

Like China is using AI like bees make honey

as a pro-ai person, i can say that our movement is full of fun, festivity, and whimsy!

we stand with all Halloween creatures: sasquatches, zombies, mummies, vampires, ghosts, and goblins!!!

even cryptids deserve to know the joy of creating ai art!!!

here's my question for antis: would you really deny these halloween creatures from creating the ai art that they enjoy?

and MOREOVER: are you going to give me a treat, or am i going to have to give you a trick?

I spent a really long time being completely anti-AI. If you showed me an image with that weird plastic lighting or hands that melted into sleeves, I had the exact same visceral reaction everyone else has. You feel annoyed, you feel like someone is trying to pull a fast one on you, and you move on.

At some point recently, though, that anger just kind of evaporated. Not because I suddenly think an algorithm has a soul or because I think text prompts make someone Leonardo da Vinci, but because I realized how predictable this whole movie is, and how it always ends the exact same way.

I remember reading old art forum threads from the mid 2000s back when digital tablets and Photoshop started getting really popular. People forget this, but traditional painters absolutely despised digital artists back then. It was genuinely toxic. If you used a Wacom tablet, you were called a fake artist who relied on crutches. People said an undo button was cheating. They said working in layers meant you had no real technical discipline. They said the computer was doing the shading for you. Digital artists had to spend years justifying their existence to people who smelled like turpentine and believed real art only existed on stretched linen.

Fast forward to today, and suddenly traditional painters and digital illustrators are standing shoulder to shoulder like they have been blood brothers since the dawn of time. The exact people who were called cheaters twenty years ago are now the ones yelling about the sanctity of human craft against someone typing words into Midjourney. The shift is almost funny if you step back and look at it from a distance.

Do not get me wrong. I completely understand why the current backlash is so loud. It is not just about the medium; it is about the blatant dishonesty that came with it. We all see the absolute flood of garbage right now. You look at Amazon and see people selling eighty-page PDFs with nonsense stories and warped illustrations they made in twenty minutes, charging real money for it. You see people on Twitter taking an artist who spent fifteen years building a recognizable style, ripping their portfolio into a local model, and generating a hundred copies while bragging about free money. You see big gacha studios quietly slipping AI assets into character portraits, only for their actual staff to walk out because they feel insulted. That stuff is genuinely gross. Being dishonest about what you are selling is scummy, and no amount of claiming to be a prompt engineer shields someone from being a fraud.

The thing nobody in the anti-camp wants to admit, though, is that the current split is temporary. Right now it feels like eighty percent of people reject it and twenty percent are pushing it. Everyone gets to feel morally righteous dunking on AI in comment sections. But if you look five or ten years down the road, does anyone honestly think it stays that way?

It never does. What actually happens is that the tech stops looking weird and glossy. The six fingers problem gets completely solved. Software companies bake it silently into the background of tools everyone already uses. The scam artists move on to the next grift once the easy money dries up. And slowly, quietly, the outrage just runs out of steam because people get tired of being angry all the time.

The kids growing up right now playing games or messing around on their phones do not carry the baggage of this era. To them, having an engine that turns thoughts into visuals will just be the default state of reality, the same way having infinite digital canvases was the default for anyone born after 1995.

A decade from now, a ton of the people currently swearing on their lives that they will never touch AI will be using some version of it to fix their lineart, generate their backgrounds, or speed up their code without even thinking about it. They will probably justify it by saying this particular feature is different, or that it is just a workflow aid. But the end result is the same.

I do not think AI is inherently good or evil. It is just an unfeeling piece of technology that reflects whatever human happens to be using it. If someone is using it to be lazy, scam people, or cut human beings out of a paycheck, they are an asshole. If an indie dev uses it as a placeholder to get a passion project off the ground because they have literally zero dollars, or if a kid uses it to make funny pictures for a school project, it is completely harmless.

I am not happy about where things are going, and I am not cheering for human artists to lose their jobs. It just feels like standing on a beach trying to punch the tide back into the ocean. The argument is already over; we are just waiting for the clock to run down.

literally most of the posts here are bait, whether pro or anti.

why can't this sub just be a place to talk with nuance?

Seems this Lora is making a lot of illegal stuff removing all the censorship of all model with her services, like she found a way de decompress the AI model image database and put illegal pictures inside or illegal programs, like she should be held responsible.

That's how the whole humanity gets exterminated by home made thermonuclear weapons, look at terminator 2 it's a documentary now.

It's such an insane creative tool that can't be replicated by 99.9% of people so it's just sad to see it blacklisted on so many subs. You can take the picture yourself and everything but stuff that technically could be done in photoshop (with extreme skill) but they're going to be braindead about it because you used AI assistance.

Hiya guys, firstly i will say im a medium to anti Ai. Not specifically because i hate AI itself. I dont trust the companies who are building it. Corporate America has not been known for their kindness over the years. But i do think it will have revolution in the medical and industrial space.

Anyway thats beside the point. I was having a think recently about how my use of the internet has drastically reduced as Ai use has got higher. I barely go on facebook anymore as it just seems to be filled with bots, slop and boomers who love it lol. Youtube seems to have quite a few obvious bot channels now, and ive slowly distanced from that. Same with a few other social media sites.

but i only just kind of thought about it the other day, how much i have gone back to reading , drawing, gardening, fixing my classic car and whatnot to improve myself and have fun rather than stick around as much in the digital space.

I wonder if this has happened to others.

For reference Mech engineer, 33, size 6.5 boot.

I've wanted to say this for a long time. I know every group has outliers who spew hate, and I'm not talking about everyone who's critical of AI. But in my experience, a lot of my conversations with people who are anti-AI end with me feeling judged just because I say I use AI, before I say anything else.

Here's where I stand. I think AI needs boundaries and real laws, like any powerful technology. Not everyone will use it well, which is exactly why regulation matters. Companies, including data centers, should be held accountable for their environmental impact. I try to support companies I think are the most ethical, and I think consumers have a role in pushing for better.

Here's how I actually use it: I do my work first, then I use AI to help edit it and close the gap between my skill and my vision. I wish I were better at my craft, but I am not trying to replace anyone. I'm trying to make something I'm proud of.

I do try to listen to people who disagree with me, but I usually leave feeling hurt, guilty, and ashamed, and like my perspective was never really heard. The argument I hear most is that AI erodes human connection. But the way people have been treating each other over this is doing more damage to human connection than the technology is.

I'm not asking anyone to agree with me. I'm asking for a conversation where we both get to be heard

The package says "train your AI in real contact". Then explains how to prompt it so it encourages you to talk with real people.

(First two pics found on Dutch sub-reddit, screenshots have been translated to English)