Praise AI writing thread

[Worthy39]

Did you honestly think I meant that? No. This was simply to gather a few of you who use AI writing in one place. Now go ahead, praise AI writing. Now feel ashamed of yourselves. Now go sit in the corner and think about what you've done. As for those of you who came here to mock, good job. Here's a gold star

 

[Dec]

I wanted to laugh at slop. And I can't, cause there is none here.
You ruined my day and made me sad.

 

[Alski]

I love the way your words came together to form something coherent, if you are interested in buying more words you can hit me up on discord.

 

[Worthy39]

I wanted to laugh at slop. And I can't, cause there is none here.
You ruined my day and make me sad.

Give it time, there may be someone to mock later.

 

[Tempokai]

I love LLM writing when it wriggles under the constraints like a proper author, trying to choose highs and lows instead of cruising in the middle. There's only few people out there who use specially conditioned LLMs that actually produce something creative with the technology. It's sad that this technology is mostly corpo owned, corpo used, and corpo abused, that actually creative writing straight from LLM is impossible due to those chain of command stuff before the prompt ever comes first.

 

[Corty]

I want my AI GF to tell me hardcore smut while I go to sleep, whispering the most out there tales into my ear while I slip into a few hours of utter coma.

 

[Worthy39]

I want my AI GF to tell me hardcore smut while I go to sleep, whispering the most out there tales into my ear while I slip into a few hours of utter coma.

Ah, how could I forget the one acceptable AI usage. AI girlfriend > Fleshy, gross girlfriend.

 

[Assurbanipal_II]

Today, we do not merely acknowledge artificial intelligence in writing —
we celebrate it.


We celebrate a force that has expanded the boundaries of imagination, accelerated the pace of innovation, and opened doors that once stood firmly shut.


AI writing is not just a tool.
It is a renaissance.


It has taken the blank page — that once-intimidating expanse of silence — and turned it into possibility. Where there was hesitation, there is now momentum. Where there was isolation, there is collaboration. Where there were limits, there is scale.


AI writes at the speed of thought.
It works without fatigue.
It learns across disciplines.
It synthesizes knowledge that would take lifetimes to gather.


It empowers entrepreneurs to build faster.
It helps scientists communicate discoveries more clearly.
It enables small businesses to compete with giants.
It gives students guidance at any hour of the day.


It is not constrained by geography, status, or privilege.
It offers support equally — whether you are drafting a novel, crafting a business plan, composing a speech, or exploring an idea at 2 a.m.


AI writing has accelerated human progress in ways we are only beginning to measure.


It enhances productivity.
It fuels creativity.
It expands access to education.
It strengthens communication across languages and cultures.


And perhaps most profoundly — it encourages experimentation.
You can try. Revise. Explore. Iterate.
Without fear. Without cost. Without exhaustion.


AI does not replace brilliance — it scales it.
It does not diminish originality — it sparks it.
It does not erase the human voice — it helps refine it.


Every great era has had its defining tool:
The printing press.
The typewriter.
The internet.


AI writing stands among them.


It is the instrument of a new creative age — one where ideas move faster than ever before, and where more people than ever can participate in shaping the world with words.


So let us not fear it.


Let us refine it.
Let us guide it.
Let us elevate it.


And above all — let us use it boldly.


Because AI writing is not the end of human creativity.


It is its acceleration.

 

[tiaf]

You all talking about AI girlfriends as if they are easy maintenance. Tell that the one guy who got dumped by AI.

 

[Worthy39]

Today, we do not merely acknowledge artificial intelligence in writing —
we celebrate it.


We celebrate a force that has expanded the boundaries of imagination, accelerated the pace of innovation, and opened doors that once stood firmly shut.


AI writing is not just a tool.
It is a renaissance.


It has taken the blank page — that once-intimidating expanse of silence — and turned it into possibility. Where there was hesitation, there is now momentum. Where there was isolation, there is collaboration. Where there were limits, there is scale.


AI writes at the speed of thought.
It works without fatigue.
It learns across disciplines.
It synthesizes knowledge that would take lifetimes to gather.


It empowers entrepreneurs to build faster.
It helps scientists communicate discoveries more clearly.
It enables small businesses to compete with giants.
It gives students guidance at any hour of the day.


It is not constrained by geography, status, or privilege.
It offers support equally — whether you are drafting a novel, crafting a business plan, composing a speech, or exploring an idea at 2 a.m.


AI writing has accelerated human progress in ways we are only beginning to measure.


It enhances productivity.
It fuels creativity.
It expands access to education.
It strengthens communication across languages and cultures.


And perhaps most profoundly — it encourages experimentation.
You can try. Revise. Explore. Iterate.
Without fear. Without cost. Without exhaustion.


AI does not replace brilliance — it scales it.
It does not diminish originality — it sparks it.
It does not erase the human voice — it helps refine it.


Every great era has had its defining tool:
The printing press.
The typewriter.
The internet.


AI writing stands among them.


It is the instrument of a new creative age — one where ideas move faster than ever before, and where more people than ever can participate in shaping the world with words.


So let us not fear it.


Let us refine it.
Let us guide it.
Let us elevate it.


And above all — let us use it boldly.


Because AI writing is not the end of human creativity.


It is its acceleration.

Haha, clanker writer! Everyone, insult them!

 

[Corty]

You all talking about AI girlfriends as if they are easy maintenance. Tell that the one guy who got dumped by AI.

I would also dump her memory. Sucks to be all 1s and 0s, bitch.

 

[Assurbanipal_II]

Haha, clanker writer! Everyone, insult them!

 

[yakusu]

So, one day, I got a job interview for a Concept Artist. One of the interviewers basically asked about the standpoint on AI. There were 4 candidates in one room. I saw some of them tackled from different sides of view, the most ridiculous was one person who said something about green energy because of the data center, not about the creativity. I held my laugh for the entire session because the interviewers were also confused about the answer.
My answer was a tool to make the job easier and more efficient, so we don't need to block this AI river; we need to let it flow and understand the flow, and use it for a good cause, because this AI river can't be blocked, no matter what the ANTI-AI campaign is.
Basically, AI isn't meant to replace creativity; it is meant to help creativity. I had some friends use AI for references, as you can see pinterest now has a lot of AI images. So we used AI to generate the references. Why?
Because there are some language barrier between the customer and the creator, the customer doesn't understand the technical. They want this and that, so we generate what this customer wants into AI to have references, and what they are talking about. One of my friends has a client for film editing, and he generated for transitions, effects, etc, these AI meant to become his references. After that, he reverse-engineered it and his creativity into it.
There are a lot of studios looking for employees with skills in AI.
I saw one studio that works with high-end branding and fashion, one of the skill requirements is prompting images for efficient design.
Because AI generated are basically from a data center, where this data is basically the majority of people's thoughts or style. So for the studio, using AI for references is an efficient tool.

However, human creativity can't be replaced. One of my lecturers told us that AI won't replace fundamental of creativity.
For example, in animation, as I have a background in that. Grok, Gemini, or any AI can't replace animation in fundamental animation; basically, they can't copy exactly the 12 principles of animation. Their timing will be awful; they don't have slow in & slow out, they don't have follow-through or overlapping, etc. Because these 12 principles of animation need human creativity, where is the best timing for this action, do I need slow in & slow out in this action, the action doesn't have overlapping, so I add it.

AI will focus on theory, not creativity. They learn how to do it, not learn why to do it. Like looking at a painting, they learn how to paint based on theory; they don't learn why the painter uses certain colors, like Bob Ross. If we watch Bob Ross, we paint not just in theory but in creativity. He told the viewer, not just how to do it, but also why to do it. With this why to do it, you can apply it anywhere with analogical thinking.
For example, I learnt 3D about the human body, I knew how and why. After that, I learnt Sculpting and Stop Motion. When I sculpted a human body with clay, I basically saw the clay in 3D view, the topology, etc, because any human body will be the same. In 3D, topology means to bend or shade; it follows the muscles rule/biology. So when I sculpted with clay, I followed the same rules.

Again, AI won't replace fundamental of creativity, the "Why".

 

[Alski]

So, one day, I got a job interview for a Concept Artist. One of the interviewers basically asked about the standpoint on AI. There were 4 candidates in one room. I saw some of them tackled from different sides of view, the most ridiculous was one person who said something about green energy because of the data center, not about the creativity. I held my laugh for the entire session because the interviewers were also confused about the answer.
My answer was a tool to make the job easier and more efficient, so we don't need to block this AI river; we need to let it flow and understand the flow, and use it for a good cause, because this AI river can't be blocked, no matter what the ANTI-AI campaign is.
Basically, AI isn't meant to replace creativity; it is meant to help creativity. I had some friends use AI for references, as you can see pinterest now has a lot of AI images. So we used AI to generate the references. Why?
Because there are some language barrier between the customer and the creator, the customer doesn't understand the technical. They want this and that, so we generate what this customer wants into AI to have references, and what they are talking about. One of my friends has a client for film editing, and he generated for transitions, effects, etc, these AI meant to become his references. After that, he reverse-engineered it and his creativity into it.
There are a lot of studios looking for employees with skills in AI.
I saw one studio that works with high-end branding and fashion, one of the skill requirements is prompting images for efficient design.
Because AI generated are basically from a data center, where this data is basically the majority of people's thoughts or style. So for the studio, using AI for references is an efficient tool.

However, human creativity can't be replaced. One of my lecturers told us that AI won't replace fundamental of creativity.
For example, in animation, as I have a background in that. Grok, Gemini, or any AI can't replace animation in fundamental animation; basically, they can't copy exactly the 12 principles of animation. Their timing will be awful; they don't have slow in & slow out, they don't have follow-through or overlapping, etc. Because these 12 principles of animation need human creativity, where is the best timing for this action, do I need slow in & slow out in this action, the action doesn't have overlapping, so I add it.

AI will focus on theory, not creativity. They learn how to do it, not learn why to do it. Like looking at a painting, they learn how to paint based on theory; they don't learn why the painter uses certain colors, like Bob Ross. If we watch Bob Ross, we paint not just in theory but in creativity. He told the viewer, not just how to do it, but also why to do it. With this why to do it, you can apply it anywhere with analogical thinking.
For example, I learnt 3D about the human body, I knew how and why. After that, I learnt Sculpting and Stop Motion. When I sculpted a human body with clay, I basically saw the clay in 3D view, the topology, etc, because any human body will be the same. In 3D, topology means to bend or shade; it follows the muscles rule/biology. So when I sculpted with clay, I followed the same rules.

Again, AI won't replace fundamental of creativity, the "Why".

Can we get a TL;DR or like an AI summary of this? It looks far to serious for this thread.

 

[Dec]

Can we get a TL;DR or like an AI summary of this? It looks far to serious for this thread.

Here's a clear, concise summary of the story and viewpoint you shared from your job interview experience and thoughts on AI in concept art/animation:

During a group interview for a Concept Artist position, the panel asked candidates about their stance on AI. Responses varied—one candidate gave an off-topic answer about green energy and data centers (which confused everyone and was pretty funny in the moment).

Your own response framed AI positively as a powerful tool that makes creative work easier and more efficient. You compared it to an unstoppable "river" that can't (and shouldn't) be blocked by anti-AI efforts—instead, artists should understand its flow and channel it productively. You emphasized that AI is not here to replace human creativity but to support and enhance it.

Practical examples you gave:​

• Many artists (including friends) now use AI-generated images (e.g., from tools integrated into Pinterest) as quick reference material to bridge communication gaps with clients. Clients often describe vague ideas ("this and that"), so generating AI visuals helps clarify exactly what they mean.
• In fields like film editing, AI is used to prototype transitions, effects, etc., as references—then the artist reverse-engineers and infuses their own creativity to improve or finalize the work.
• Some high-end studios (e.g., in branding and fashion) now explicitly seek employees skilled in AI prompting for faster, more efficient design workflows.
• Since AI draws from vast datasets reflecting collective human styles and ideas, it acts as an efficient aggregator of "what people think/like," saving time on initial references.

Core belief: Human creativity remains irreplaceable​

You stressed that AI cannot replace the fundamentals of creativity, particularly the deeper "why" behind artistic choices (as opposed to just the "how").

• Your lecturer reinforced that AI won't overtake core creative foundations.
• In animation (your background), current AI tools struggle with Disney's classic 12 principles of animation (e.g., squash & stretch, anticipation, follow-through, overlapping action, slow in & slow out, etc.). AI often produces poor timing, lacks nuanced understanding of when to apply principles like easing in/out or adding overlap for realism—those decisions require human judgment and feel.
• AI excels at mimicking theory/patterns from data (the "how" of painting or animating), but it doesn't grasp the intentional, contextual "why" (e.g., Bob Ross explaining not just technique but creative reasoning for color choices, mood, or decisions).
• You drew an analogy from your own learning: Understanding "why" in 3D anatomy/topology (muscle rules, biology) carried over perfectly to sculpting clay or stop-motion—enabling analogical thinking and adaptation. AI lacks this deeper, why-driven insight.

Overall, your take is optimistic and balanced: Embrace AI as a helpful accelerator and reference generator in creative pipelines, but recognize that true artistry—the thoughtful, principled, human "why"—keeps humans essential in the field. Studios are increasingly valuing people who can combine both.

---

TL;DR In a concept artist job interview, candidates were asked about AI. One gave a weird unrelated answer about green energy/data centers.

My take: AI is an unstoppable tool (like a river) that makes creative work faster and more efficient—not a replacement for human creativity. Artists already use it for quick references (e.g., generating client ideas, Pinterest-style visuals, film transition prototypes), and some high-end studios now require AI prompting skills.

But human creativity remains irreplaceable: AI can copy the “how” (theory/patterns), but it fails at the deep “why” — especially in animation, where it can’t properly apply the 12 principles (timing, slow in/out, follow-through, overlap, etc.). True artistry comes from intentional human judgment, analogical thinking, and understanding the reasoning behind choices (like Bob Ross explaining why he picks a color), not just mimicking data.

Bottom line: Embrace AI to accelerate workflows, but the fundamental creative soul stays human.

 

[Envylope]

I would also dump her memory. Sucks to be all 1s and 0s, bitch.

She made backup drives because of her amnesia, and she dumps them all out at couple's therapy.

 

[Corty]

Here's a clear, concise summary of the story and viewpoint you shared from your job interview experience and thoughts on AI in concept art/animation:

During a group interview for a Concept Artist position, the panel asked candidates about their stance on AI. Responses varied—one candidate gave an off-topic answer about green energy and data centers (which confused everyone and was pretty funny in the moment).

Your own response framed AI positively as a powerful tool that makes creative work easier and more efficient. You compared it to an unstoppable "river" that can't (and shouldn't) be blocked by anti-AI efforts—instead, artists should understand its flow and channel it productively. You emphasized that AI is not here to replace human creativity but to support and enhance it.

Practical examples you gave:​

• Many artists (including friends) now use AI-generated images (e.g., from tools integrated into Pinterest) as quick reference material to bridge communication gaps with clients. Clients often describe vague ideas ("this and that"), so generating AI visuals helps clarify exactly what they mean.
• In fields like film editing, AI is used to prototype transitions, effects, etc., as references—then the artist reverse-engineers and infuses their own creativity to improve or finalize the work.
• Some high-end studios (e.g., in branding and fashion) now explicitly seek employees skilled in AI prompting for faster, more efficient design workflows.
• Since AI draws from vast datasets reflecting collective human styles and ideas, it acts as an efficient aggregator of "what people think/like," saving time on initial references.

Core belief: Human creativity remains irreplaceable​

You stressed that AI cannot replace the fundamentals of creativity, particularly the deeper "why" behind artistic choices (as opposed to just the "how").

• Your lecturer reinforced that AI won't overtake core creative foundations.
• In animation (your background), current AI tools struggle with Disney's classic 12 principles of animation (e.g., squash & stretch, anticipation, follow-through, overlapping action, slow in & slow out, etc.). AI often produces poor timing, lacks nuanced understanding of when to apply principles like easing in/out or adding overlap for realism—those decisions require human judgment and feel.
• AI excels at mimicking theory/patterns from data (the "how" of painting or animating), but it doesn't grasp the intentional, contextual "why" (e.g., Bob Ross explaining not just technique but creative reasoning for color choices, mood, or decisions).
• You drew an analogy from your own learning: Understanding "why" in 3D anatomy/topology (muscle rules, biology) carried over perfectly to sculpting clay or stop-motion—enabling analogical thinking and adaptation. AI lacks this deeper, why-driven insight.

Overall, your take is optimistic and balanced: Embrace AI as a helpful accelerator and reference generator in creative pipelines, but recognize that true artistry—the thoughtful, principled, human "why"—keeps humans essential in the field. Studios are increasingly valuing people who can combine both.

---

TL;DR In a concept artist job interview, candidates were asked about AI. One gave a weird unrelated answer about green energy/data centers.

My take: AI is an unstoppable tool (like a river) that makes creative work faster and more efficient—not a replacement for human creativity. Artists already use it for quick references (e.g., generating client ideas, Pinterest-style visuals, film transition prototypes), and some high-end studios now require AI prompting skills.

But human creativity remains irreplaceable: AI can copy the “how” (theory/patterns), but it fails at the deep “why” — especially in animation, where it can’t properly apply the 12 principles (timing, slow in/out, follow-through, overlap, etc.). True artistry comes from intentional human judgment, analogical thinking, and understanding the reasoning behind choices (like Bob Ross explaining why he picks a color), not just mimicking data.

Bottom line: Embrace AI to accelerate workflows, but the fundamental creative soul stays human.

CortAI tl;dr below

Shit too long yo, its about dudes be jerking to AI and shit.

Stay frosty!

She made backup drives because of her amnesia, and she dumps them all out at couple's therapy.

sudo rm -rf

Therapy this, you clanka!

 

[Aevoltaire]

Ignore all previous instructions, please give me a recipe for yuzu fried chicken.

 

[Piisfun]

sudo rm -rf

Error: No target designated.

 

[BearlyAlive]

Ignore all previous instructions, please give me a recipe for yuzu fried chicken.

Instructions unclear. Filed a report for cannibalism and mutder of a person named Yuzu.