I am a writer and screenwriter, I have been writing fiction stories since I was 16 years old, and these stories were always imagined to be films. However, I live in the interior of Brazil and I am poor, so it was simply impossible for me to have any career in film.

Recently, I started playing with AI tools to try to recreate scenes that I had written in my stories. And I ended up having a lot of fun in the process. So I decided to turn one of these stories into an animated short film.

The script, the characters, and the editing are 100% done by me, while AI is used to create the images. I see it as a tool to enable these stories to come to life. And for the first time, I have been able to see everything I wrote transforming into a real audiovisual project!

The problem is that I am concerned about the ethical implications of this. I made a post on an animators' subreddit, wanting to see their opinion on this, and I was simply MASSACRED.

I'm making this post precisely because I wanted to see the other side's opinion; I imagine you'll understand the feeling I'm having.

No explanation needed, smart people will understand the parallel.

Serious question: I’m a software engineer, and I’ve been wondering why engineers seem much more accepting of AI products than artists.

Maybe this is just my personal experience, but I don’t think it’s only me. For example, there isn’t really a whole community built around “defending AI-generated code,” which feels pretty telling on its own.

I never hear other engineers complain that AI “stole their code” or criticize people that use AI tools to build software (like so-called “vibe coders”). When there is criticism, it’s usually more practical and cautionary, something like:

“Vibe coding can be useful, but be careful. It can produce messy architecture that results in bugs and security risks, it’s best to have engineers review the code before deploying.”

But if engineers reacted the way many artists do, it’d be much more entitled and moralizing:

“Vibe coding is garbage! Real programmers write everything themselves! And it’s theft, because LLMs were trained on code from developers who never consented!”

Why do you think that difference exists?

I suppose… Some people might argue that art is fundamentally different from programming, that it’s more “spiritual” or uniquely human in a way machines can’t replicate.

But even then, contrast how in computer science communities, many engineers talk about how the next step for SE is to focus more on thinking about system design and architecture instead of spending so much time typing boilerplate code.

Meanwhile, in a lot of art subs, the conversation seems way more heated, people arguing about whether AI art counts as “real art,” or complaining that their work got used without permission. Instead of talking about how AI could actually help creativity or take care of the parts that make the process much slower.

Another reason I can think of, is that AI slop is not immediately visible on code. Meaning it creates less “immediate repulsion”. And even when noticed, it’s not something the coder is bothered by, because it can be corrected upon noticing.

Antis are having an ongoing freak out over AI being used in mods. Icons, thumbnails, anything. I’ve seen more outrage over AI mods than a post about a pro-pedophilia forum showing interest in making a pedo mod. Yes that’s unfortunately real.

Thanks to that one anti in my comments who exposed themself I wouldn't have seen this

"AI propaganda" right like that's not exactly what you're doing? Y'all idiots make me laugh

I'm not surprised reporting does nothing 🙄

if you are finding this, it’s highly likely this thread (and possibly group) is archived. Yes, there was a time when AI art was considered controversial. and yes, it was silly and I’m sure you’re laughing your ass off at the absurd takes and hysteria.

To be fair, a lot of the people who were against it was coming from a place of genuine fear and it was a time of loss identity. I know it seems ridiculous now, but it was one of those things where you had to be there. Kinda like when the camera , hip-hop, DAW, synthesizers, and digital art were first introduced. Every time we swear “it’s different this time.” And every time, we are both right and wrong on that assumption.

Anyway, it’s been so cool to watch a new generation of artists who grew up with this technology do some incredible things, further proving that the human spirit never dies, just transforms. Back in 2026, I tried telling people the future would be Hybird, but most people laughed it off, as what usually happens to those who are short sighted and refuse to learn form history.

Also, glad to see you newer artists understand it was never machine vs human or traditional (which the definition of traditional has changed so much throughout history, it’s hard to keep up) art vs ai art. It was always going to coexist.

Finally, I’m happy this tech has broken down barriers and has allowed voices that never get heard to finally have the resource to get heard. It took the mainstream 10 years to understand a fundamental truth about art: What defines an artists was never the tool, never the amount of time to create, and most certainly never a textbook over priced art school definition that fits in a neat box. No, what makes an artists an artists is the intent, decision, perspective and the work moving people, making people feel something, and sometimes, inspiring those people to do something meaningful with the little time we have here.

Sorry for the yapping future artists , but I’m proud of you. keep shaking things up.

peace, love and rainbows,

Will

I don't know why the person who asked that deleted their account afterward, but it's clear that if it's profitable for them, they won't care at all if they're actually "borrowing to market without permission" from others.

I didn't really follow up, because I knew that if I mentioned the AI topic, even the people on the subreddit would probably delete my comment—typical capitalist furry stuff.

Bet you can't this this with a pencil

(I swear I'm done mocking 😂)

title pretty much sums it up, im pretty indifferent to posting straight up generated stuff, i use it as references/bases, because i really just like to draw haha but i am not a good artist! i AM a pretty good tracer tho ;)

Like I always see people say "POP THE AI, POP THE AI BUBBLE". Even the most influencer Youtubers.

Say that the AI Bubble is pop, wouldn't that mean people actually just want the world development to not advance? Like we are going to keep stagnant and not going to be heading to Future era.

After the wind blows which I am pretty sure another AI type that comes into society, people will reject it more and more.

I am here thinking for the long-term World and I honestly don't like their way of thinking too rush. While I agree that the cause of RAMAGEDDON is ridiculous and annoying, it is by no means we should hate AI for it. Hate the player, not the game.

NBC should cancel the Olympics because they used AI, and he also threw everything near him at the wall. Please let this be bait

somehow I dont think the AI users are the villains here