AI this, AI that - you can't go anywhere without something trying to force AI on you. Usually a company trying to get you to buy into what they've wasted billions on. So indie devs have begun fighting back with their No Gen AI Seal.
Grammarly predates commercial generative AI, as I attempted to explain to you before. It’s over a decade old. You clearly don’t understand the core mechanisms of any of these things.
You seem to be missing the point that’s been made here since your ignorance is “ai bad”.
A tools a tool, any tool can be abused. So it’s a very hypocrital view to say these tools are acceptable, but make up arbitrary reasons why those ones aren’t. That’s what’s being done here, and why people are trying to shift the conversation focus to the “tool itself”.
Since even photoshop, grammarly, or any other non-ai tool is labour a usable too.
If we want humans doing stuff, why is a brushing tool acceptable? It’s not a human doing the work. So yeah the views here are extremely hypocritical.
Says the hypocrite that says one tool that replaces humans is okay, but not another.
Okay buddy, just because you can’t make a coherent argument or come up with a legitimate reason why one’s acceptable doesn’t make me slow. If anything just shows how flawed and fucked your reasoning is.
People have always used tools to replace humans. So this decry NOW over ai is what’s bullshit. They shouldn’t enable to use PS brush tools either. Same process, same outcome, the ai can actually be able to do more and remove labor. But now “that’s” not okay. This is what me and other users are pointing out.
But your “ai bad” bias, has made you ignorant to any actual discussions.
If you don’t want ai, than you don’t want grammarly, spellcheck, auto correct, PS or any other tool. If you do, you’re frankly a bloody Luddite hypocrite.
The same “repeating” can be said to you, and is probably why you’re projecting more fallacies onto me.
Ant “debunking” you’ve done, is to justify your bias that certain tools to replace humans are okay. And that’s obviously a hypocrital take, so what’s your real issue here? Just like anyone else, the term “ai” is just a trigger and you don’t like it? It to have it poured to your already “acceptable” tools make you go “REE”?
These same conversations were had with luddites like you when spellcheck came out, than PS, than grammarly. And guess what? They’re acceptable in everyday use.
The same will happen with AI as people treat more like a tool than a toy. Than jackasses like you will be left behind again, but then try and justify it like you are beee when the next one comes out.
Hypocritical Luddites like you are just the worst kind of fucking people.
Grammarly predates commercial generative AI, as I attempted to explain to you before. It’s over a decade old. You clearly don’t understand the core mechanisms of any of these things.
You seem to be missing the point that’s been made here since your ignorance is “ai bad”.
A tools a tool, any tool can be abused. So it’s a very hypocrital view to say these tools are acceptable, but make up arbitrary reasons why those ones aren’t. That’s what’s being done here, and why people are trying to shift the conversation focus to the “tool itself”.
Since even photoshop, grammarly, or any other non-ai tool is labour a usable too.
If we want humans doing stuff, why is a brushing tool acceptable? It’s not a human doing the work. So yeah the views here are extremely hypocritical.
bro just doesn’t get it, sorry you’re slow mate
Says the hypocrite that says one tool that replaces humans is okay, but not another.
Okay buddy, just because you can’t make a coherent argument or come up with a legitimate reason why one’s acceptable doesn’t make me slow. If anything just shows how flawed and fucked your reasoning is.
People have always used tools to replace humans. So this decry NOW over ai is what’s bullshit. They shouldn’t enable to use PS brush tools either. Same process, same outcome, the ai can actually be able to do more and remove labor. But now “that’s” not okay. This is what me and other users are pointing out.
But your “ai bad” bias, has made you ignorant to any actual discussions.
If you don’t want ai, than you don’t want grammarly, spellcheck, auto correct, PS or any other tool. If you do, you’re frankly a bloody Luddite hypocrite.
You’re not even arguing at this point, you’re just repeating false claims I already debunked as if saying things louder might make you more correct.
What have you debunked?
The same “repeating” can be said to you, and is probably why you’re projecting more fallacies onto me.
Ant “debunking” you’ve done, is to justify your bias that certain tools to replace humans are okay. And that’s obviously a hypocrital take, so what’s your real issue here? Just like anyone else, the term “ai” is just a trigger and you don’t like it? It to have it poured to your already “acceptable” tools make you go “REE”?
These same conversations were had with luddites like you when spellcheck came out, than PS, than grammarly. And guess what? They’re acceptable in everyday use.
The same will happen with AI as people treat more like a tool than a toy. Than jackasses like you will be left behind again, but then try and justify it like you are beee when the next one comes out.
Hypocritical Luddites like you are just the worst kind of fucking people.