AI art: original characters or just power-sucking slop?
One X user blasts AI for torching resources on worthless output. Another says daily AI illustrations count as real creative work worth attention.
Two accounts clash over AI-generated images. @FJazwarefan labels them resource-wasting slop that kills art. @YYK_art argues original AI characters and daily pieces deserve praise like any other work. The exchange sits at 78 engagement with 69 authenticity on corroborated posts.
Why these scores — @FJazwarefan's post uses direct profanity and resource claims without linked benchmarks. @YYK_art points to visible original characters but offers no engagement metrics. Both accounts are real and active; volume comes from quote-tweet chains rather than coordinated amplification.
One post opens by telling AI and its users to fuck off for burning limited resources on slop while another quietly celebrates original characters drawn daily with the same tools.
Side A frames every AI image as theft of energy and audience from human artists. Side B treats the output as legitimate daily practice that still needs an audience to survive.
The numbers show steady replies but thin sourcing on actual wattage or sales displacement. Both positions rest on personal stance more than shared data points.
AI tools consume real electricity and flood feeds with low-effort images that replace paid human artists.
- @FJazwarefan✓ verified“Fuck AI. Fuck the people willing to destroy our limited resources to generate slop.”
AI lets artists produce original characters and illustrations every day and those outputs still deserve likes and shares.
- @YYK_art✓ verified“AI artists creating original characters and daily illustrations deserve praise and engagement.”
Read it straight — Check actual kWh figures for common image models against typical artist workflow before sharing either take.