![Your bad art is better than AI slop [Sophie Labelle]](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/c2feca8b-da2b-4e53-9ec3-04b436e86a0d.webp){kind=link}
Sophie Labelle | Instagram | Bluesky
Transcript
four frame comic.
first frame shows a typical AI poster that says : All chatgpt flyers look the same, especially with this font! the text above it reads : I won’t go to your event if the poster was made by AI.
second frame shows a still frame from a Hank Green youtube video. text above reads : I won’t read your post or email and I won’t watch your video if they were made with AI.
third frame shows an AI restaurant poster of burgers and chicken in a window. text reads : I won’t patronize your shop or restaurant if it is advertised with AI.
last frame shows an MS paint window with badly written : Your bad art is better than AI slop. text reads : if you can’t take the time or make the effort to interact with me yourself, then why should I do it?
he has been held to account. He already spoke on it. Yet that’s not stopping the outrage mob needing a villain to shovel out rage content for clicks.
Because at this point, with this comic, it’s not about holding him to account. That’s done. At this point, it’s farming for clout. Tying to dunk on a man with decades of charity and education because it might get a few likes.
It is illogical to assume that making people aware of communicative failures in science is done for the sake of clout. Making people aware of a failure in public science communication is a good and responsible thing, even after the event.
It is reasonable to still share the comic because the overall point is valid—even if he already apologized—both because sharing knowledge is good, and because the choice of whether to still watch Hank after his apology is individual; just because you and I forgive him doesn’t make it unfair not to trust him as a result of this (I take the stance that I will continue to watch his content as long as he does not repeat this mistake: forgiveness is not permission, after all).
To use his failing as an example of this negative behavior, or to make the choice not to watch his content because of his AI use, is fair. To assume sharing the fact that he did and a resultant choice of the comic author (to not watch that one tainted video, which I also will not watch) were for clout is not fair or reasonable.
K
To remix an old saying: “A controversy can travel halfway around the world before the apology has time to put on its shoes”. Sadly most outlets who reported on Hank’s AI accusations aren’t rushing to say “oh yeah he apologized”. Maybe they stick it in an update in the article without changing the headline.
The world sucks. So this will stick around much longer than it needed to.
I’m sorry, what does this comic have to do with this favorite YouTube guy of yours? Is he referenced in here somewhere?
Not the person you replied to, but the top right frame appears to be a reference to him.