it's really hard to find sympathy for anyone STILL using twitter at this point
this post was submitted on 21 Jul 2026
87 points (92.2% liked)
Fuck AI
7748 readers
768 users here now
"We did it, Patrick! We made a technological breakthrough!"
A place for all those who loathe AI to discuss things, post articles, and ridicule the AI hype. Proud supporter of working people. And proud booer of SXSW 2024.
AI, in this case, refers to LLMs, GPT technology, and anything listed as "AI" meant to increase market valuations.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Both are idiots, grock already consumes all his fan art...
Not that this shouldn't happen,but to prevent this again I would start by not uploading it to twitter. Or in general the internet. Again not justifying the EULA or the user base, its just the only direct thing I think you can do.
Even if no one told grok to do this, grok is still absorbing everything you upload on to that.
Was there editing? The two pictures look the same to me.
It was edited into an animation
ah thanks.
I don't get it, the drawing is and isn't the green person's drawing?
Well, Green drew it. Red claims Green has no ownership and can't tell Red what they can and can't do with the drawing Green made of a character that is neither Red's nor Green's. Why Red thinks that, I don't know.
Ok so "the character isn't Green's" but they still drew it?
That is what was confusing.
I imagine it will be some fanart. In a legal sense, that character would probably be the intellectual property of whoever owns the work. In an artistic sense, Green invested the time and effort to create this specific artwork.
The general vibe in fanart communities I've been in is that you're allowed to take bits from other people's work and make something new with them, so long as you also invest the time and effort to actually make something artistic yourself and give credit. It's also considered good manners to ask the artist for permission, as a gesture of acknowledgement and respect for the work they put in.
Red contributed nothing, asked nothing, just shoved it into an AI to slop up some animated version. On top of the general disdain that actual artists tend to have for AI-generated content, that's just plainly disrespectful.
In that framing, Red is correct that Green doesn't own the character, but wrong to assert that Green also doesn't own the artwork. How that would shake out in a legal sense, I don't know, but it's a dick move either way.
Thank you, thats a grwat explanation