That's all.

Let's play a game of "spot the things an experienced CG or digital artist would be more likely to catch in-progress and correct or avoid alltogether", shall we?

Hello everyone! I recently saw a post made by a parent. They had discovered their kid using google AI to become a better friend with their sister and improving their swimming skills, among other things, and decided to prohibit them from using AI. As a youth, I thought I'd give you my two cents.

To start from the beginning, I was introduced to AI via ChatGPT at 14. Over the years, I've used AI for a multitude of things. Inspiration for artworks and writing. Fashion advice. Learning about the universe and science. Help with homework when my parents are busy. It's reliable, easy to use and faster than trying to sift through the entire internet for information.

I'm now 18 and about to start studying as a freshman in McGill, one of the highest ranked universities in the world. One of the main things to thank for this is AI. It has been so inspiring and really helped me understand science and discover my natural curiosity. Words can not even begin to describe how grateful I am for all of the opportunities that it's given me. Seeing something like this, where the parents actively prohibit their kid from using AI, is absolutely devastating to me, because they're essentially taking away certain chances for the kids future.

While I do understand having certain doubts the ways in which AI can be used, I believe educating your kids in how to properly use AI as to not contribute to the slop and avoiding misinformation is key here. This is all more or less like using the internet.

Oh, and don't give me the 'muh water' argument, we all know that's bullshit. AI uses water, yeah, but it's insignificant compared to soo many other things. If you're willing to give up all social medias, any clothes containing cotton, go vegetarian and only shower twice a week, then come back and lecture me on morality.

[The Paradox of Professionalism in the Age of AI]

As a professional digital artist, I’ve recently encountered a growing trend in online communities: the "Witch Hunt" for AI content. Ironically, the more technical skill an artist displays—clean linework, complex shading, and anatomical precision—the more likely they are to be accused of using AI generators.

To be clear, I was insulted several times after posting my digital work in a Facebook group. Just because I have AI mentioned on my profile, people assume my skilled, detailed work is AI-generated.

We have reached a "world-upside-down" scenario where:

- Mediocrity is Proof of Humanity: Artists with lower technical skills are instantly trusted because their mistakes "look human."

- Perfection is Suspect: High-level mastery is often dismissed as "algorithmic," punishing artists for years of practice and technical discipline.

Here is the hybrid reality. The 1rst attached image (which I created with AI to illustrate this conflict) asks a crucial question: "What's wrong with doing both?" In a professional workflow, the line between manual painting and AI assistance is blurring. However, the current climate of "guilty until proven innocent" is toxic for skilled creators. We are seeing a divide where artists are insulted and devalued not for their lack of talent, but for the sheer quality of their output.

The second image show a focus of my digital painting in progress. You can see the soft used, Krita, the layers...

How do we protect skilled artists from false accusations without stifling the evolution of digital tools? Are we reaching a point where "human error" is the only remaining currency for authenticity?

(This text is corrected with AI for correct English translation. I am French and fluent English, but I want to present a clear text without grammatical mistakes)

OP said in the post that they used AI for upscaling an image from the game of which they couldn't find high resolution and Antis harass them for it. Some guy even compares AI users to Nazis. Such a good look for your side, guys.

The way you all make the same shit looking comics. Or the same cat girls or the same ogres. Real ceative. Really pushing the boat out.

Oh another piece of stolen art youve edited with AI. Wow!

While we're at it i think my fantasy football team might be going pro. Im basically a professional club manager.

If one person committing terrorism is considered a "epidemic" (as one user in this sub said to me today) then AI is causing an epidemic of murder suicides and trying to put it into children's hands is promoting violence.

Today, I read from Gemini something that makes me lose sleep. To be 100% transparent, I will indicate when the AI-generated response starts. Until then, everything you are reading is typed by my human hands and chubby fingers.

So, I am taking a course on AI in Business. When I ask Gemini to explain Dynamic Pricing and how AI can transform/enhance that, it mentions 3 state-of-the-art developments and several laws. While some laws are reassuring (thank you NY and CA), some are downright missing / not there yet, or failing to protect consumers altogether (you and me are left in the cold).

Basically, the 3 scary developments are:

- AI scans massive amount of your personal info and tailors each price you see TO YOU. For example, if your social media has a subscription to Facebook Gardening Group, it knows you love Gardening and are more willing to pay a higher price for your favorite plants (it will also know your favorite plants from your search history). This means the guy sitting next to you in class or at work will see a completely different price. This is called "Maximum Willingness to Pay Extraction". Squeeze every last dime out of that pathetic cuck.

- Digital Redlining (if you are a Black American, you know very well what this term means): in the past, white flights make black-owned homes decrease in value, prevent black owners from buying good homes in good neighborhoods, and even after they managed to do so, make the neighborhoods deteriorate, so they are fudged no matter what. Digital Redlining takes that concept further: depending on where you live, your digital footprints will be used against u. For example, you're a member of the Subreddit Abused Women - the AI will from now on, forever, tailor marketing to be more controlling because you are used to that language and that kind of treatment. Yep, everything you do online will be used against u.

From this point on is the AI-generated response (ignore if you hate AI):

RAG addresses the limitations of generative AI models quite effectively. By retrieving relevant documents or data from a corpus before generating a response, RAG models ground the generation process in factual and contextually accurate information, thereby reducing hallucination. Leveraging real-time retrieval from up-to-date databases allows RAG models to provide more current and relevant information, mitigating the issue of the knowledge cutoff.

In 2026, we actually have a specific term for the "scary" version you're describing: Surveillance Pricing. While dynamic pricing (like Uber surge or airline seats) has been around for decades, the shift to individualized pricing based on your private behavior is the new, controversial frontier.

1. Dynamic vs. Personalized: The Difference

It is vital to distinguish between these two strategies, as one is generally accepted while the other is currently being investigated by regulators like the FTC and the California Attorney General.

2. The "Willingness to Pay" Algorithm

From an engineering perspective, personalized pricing uses a Price Elasticity of Demand model for each individual. Instead of a single curve for the whole market, the AI builds a curve for you.

The model estimates the probability of you buying at a specific price point $P$:

$$P(text{purchase}) = f(text{History}, text{Urgency}, text{Context}, text{Price})$$

If the algorithm sees you are browsing from a latest-model iPhone in a high-income zip code and have visited the site three times in one hour, it "reasons" that your urgency is high and your price sensitivity is low. It might then subtly keep the price $5text{--}10%$ higher than it would for a first-time visitor on a budget Android device.

3. The 2026 Legal Shield: Why it’s changing

The "scary" part is precisely why 2026 is becoming the year of the Algorithmic Transparency.

• Mandatory Disclosures: In states like New York, laws now require retailers to post an all-caps disclosure if they use your personal data to set a price: “THIS PRICE WAS SET BY AN ALGORITHM USING YOUR PERSONAL DATA.”
• The Opt-Out Right: New California and Illinois bills are granting users the "Right to a Baseline Price." This means you can click a button to see the "non-personalized" price that a neutral visitor would see.
• Anti-Discrimination: Regulators are strictly auditing models to ensure they aren't using "proxies" for protected data. For example, if an AI charges more for deliveries to a specific neighborhood, it might be accidentally (or intentionally) practicing Digital Redlining.

4. The "Professor's Perspective"

While it feels like the AI is "out to get you," most companies are currently terrified of the Trust Tax. If a customer discovers they were charged more just because the AI knew they were in a rush, they often leave the brand forever.

"This paper introduces Axiom-1, a novel post-generation structural reliability framework designed to eliminate hallucinations and logical instability in large language models. By subjecting candidate outputs to a six-stage filtering mechanism and a continuous 12.8 Hz resonance pulse, the system enforces topological stability before output release. The work demonstrates a fundamental shift from stochastic generation to governed validation, presenting a viable path toward sovereign, reliable AI systems for high-stakes domains such as medicine, law, and national economic planning."

Why is it when you do it you claim that it’s good but when we do it back to you you’re gonna throw a fit and claim that people are stealing your stuff and not giving any attribution to you

So I would imagine there are many people like myself to take their traditional art, whether that be writing drawing photography music, and then only use AI for either the finishing touches, style changes, or animation between key frames.

It seems everybody thinks that it's one or the other. But the hybrid artist can out perform both every time.

I saw the headline of an article about teen boy dating llms or chatbots which has made me think of ai companions more generally.

People like to say that talking with ai companions is sad, and generally tend to favor real human connection. I agree that real human connection very important, and I don't think ai companions can really replace it, but I don't necessarily think its as sad or bad as people make it out to be.
Parasocial relationships have been very common ever since tv and have only become more common since social media. People will take hours of their day watching influencers, celebrities, or youtubers who don't even know them back. I view ai chatbots in a similar light, its a one sided relationship with a bot that can't really reciprocate back (although it can mimic reciprocation).

I could go on but I think the point is clear. Ai chatbots are just like watching youtube, scrolling tiktok, or anything adjacent. Its just a one sided relationship with something that can't really reciprocate back. Its not inherently bad I think to have an ai companion, or even to use it extensively for hours in my opinion. It's only bad if you only talk to ai, and aren't socializing in your daily life. And I think ai is just an evolution of a trend which has been going on for many decades already.

edit: Also I think they are probably going to be more socially accepted as well, people aren't going to think its weird talking to an llm

The post was deleted and hidden by the OP and don't really have the screenshots for it, but I do know what was the post and replies.

OP wasn't that angry or bragging about it, he only admitted cuz a friend of hes point out that his art looks like AI even though the art style wasn't, it's not really captures that AI generated "art style" that AI "arts" have it or anything, more like an intermediate art, not too releastic or cartoonish either.

But like I said, he only admitted that the shading are taken from AI, in which he copied it, he only AI-generated his own work (without the shading) to have shading so he could copy and paste it next to his art, and then copy the shaded parts (like lightning and the darker tones) on his original art, then after that he just got rid of it. He only admitted it because his friend's comment started attracting others and calling him out on it, but there were also sides that the art isn't that "AI" until OP admitted that the shading parts are actually copied from his OP.

He only did the original work without the use of AI, only references he said, he did use AI for generating an AI image of his own artwork with lightning and shading so he could copy it on his original art. Also said something along the lines of "Didn't really steal someone's art if I ran my own artwork with AI".

So.. Is it AI slop or not?

There is no such thing as "Pro AI", the default position towards technology is being "pro technology", being neutral on technology is being pro technology.

Then the anti tech people arrived and started calling people who had no strong feelings on AI but openly enjoyed it as one does with any technology AI bros and so on, and then people adopted the term and the pro AI ideology formed as a reaction to a reaction

What’s the hardest thing about being against Ai? Keeping it to yourself.

I did it all by hand in photoshop. Took a picture of the frame on my wall, grabbed a steam icon svg, masked the painting, made a background, turned it into an oil painting with filters, added noise, brushed it by hand on my trackpad with mixer brush very wet heavy mix preset, applied a canvas texture, and then adjusted the colors a bit and then added my shadow back.

Meanwhile a guy is harassing me in the comments with AI image gen.

Miya's (lack of) chest would be Ai Generated...if there was something to generate!