ShoemakerThe
3601
182
42
Yes this is Ai. Yes that’s the joke. Credit to Kur-Art-Alt
Jul 19, 2025 1:51 AM
ShoemakerThe
3601
182
42
Yes this is Ai. Yes that’s the joke. Credit to Kur-Art-Alt
snofler
Dracology
I know there is a hate on for AI here, there, and everywhere but I'd be lying if I pretended it can't make some attractive art sometimes.
VulpesIncendium
RavnVidarson
AI prompters shouldn't claim to have made anything. They just commissioned a computer to do the work for them.
TheMoonBnuuy
well for starters, assuming it's not AI, this one in particular looks like it has both soft and hard brushes which humans can do but rarely do, but AI often does. Though I don't think this one is AI. It has certain kinds of anatomy weirdness that AIs are trained NOT to make.
GreaseMonkeyOfLove
Whitebeardthepirate
RabidMuffin
Tails and titties.
KarateCanine
Because youre stealing from an AI thieving cunt/AI artist? So I don't know... Maybe you are a good guy? I don't know how this works. But fuck AI art. And fuck you for claiming it as your own.
ElectricSlideOrchestra
Golly
InsertUnimaginativeUsernameHere
True. This is a level of horny that AI cannot imitate.
DePhyler
Underboob is the best boob!
AllMaktAtTengilVarBefriare
Sideboob has been in the spotlight for too long, we need a golden age of underboob!
ImmaCatImmaSexyCat
Why give credit to an AI "artist?" Fuck em.
LifeIsADanceOfMinds
Fingers seem... inhuman.
Dracology
Which joke to go with "You're looking at the HANDS?!", "Hands? I didn't see any hands", or "it might be because that isn't a human"
Samthetrue
Hands are HARD to draw. I'd almost say that it's an inhuman talant to be good at it.
And personally, I'd say these toe beans look inhuman.
DontAskMeAboutMyUsernameOkay
Well it might be because you're posting content from a self-proclaimed AI artist...![]()
FeIineDisrespectFromBehind
Whoosh
ShoemakerThe
And you’d be right.
FancypantsMcGill
And the win for not reading the image description goes to...
TwitchFox
if only the text had been there at the beginning.
FancypantsMcGill
😅 I can't speak to that. If it wasn't then disregard my comment.
TwitchFox
I dunno man, probably for something along the lines of:
FeIineDisrespectFromBehind
Woosh
TwitchFox
If only the "I did this as a joke." was there to begin with.
ShoemakerThe
And you’d be right.
AllMaktAtTengilVarBefriare
Maybe read the entire post?
TwitchFox
It wasn't there the first time round.
InboxMeYourHDGIFs
Well, I never post AI images if I can help it. Unfortunately for that rule of mine, it's becoming harder and harder to pick them out.
ShoemakerThe
It is. And I am always on the look out for it. I did this to be funny since I was accused of posting nothing but Ai art.
FeIineDisrespectFromBehind
Well, I thought it was funny. Bonus points for all the people who didn't read the full post.
MyHuskyAteMySandwichAgain
Some guy sold a banana nailed to the wall for millions of dollars calling it art. If AI makes something interesting, I'm past splitting hairs. Humans should have been better if they wanted to high road this topic.
lesteros
the banana was a silly idea but costed almost nothing. AI art costs a lot of resources to generate, resources that should not belong to the 'artist' in the first pace - thats the difference in the controversy.
MyHuskyAteMySandwichAgain
The cost to create? Nailing a banana to a wall isn't creative or inspired. Spending millions on a banana nailed to a wall (which was then eaten and replaced) is not art. Even the artist who did it was disgusted by the absurdity of it all. Your comment is absurd and I'll just add it to the funeral pyre of the false good faith. AI isn't replacing artists. It's replacing bulk junk. If an artist feels threatened by AI it's because they made bulk junk.
lesteros
so now you show you have no damn idea how much it costed to create anything. It is not the same as the amount someone paying for it. The fucking banana was at least an original idea, silly as it might be for some. AI art not only draws from legit artists as their learning source, without consent or credit or pay, it also burns a ton of raw energy - power and water, to just generate its shit. This is what I meant and you missed.
MyHuskyAteMySandwichAgain
I didn't miss it, I didn't care. You're combining a bunch of different arguments which are valid and then you slap them into an argument meat loaf which is worse overall than the sum of its parts. Resource allocation, derivative concepts, and copyright laws are all great points which have nothing to do with my original comment and each of those 3 points also have great weight and validity as independent thought rather than a cobbled mess. We don't entirely disagree about your points.