Logged out. Come wam again soon!
|
|
|||
| forums: groups: | |||
|
"AI Attitudes Survey 2025"
Love you, tooSaturation Hall, Langstonedale
Lord of the Pies
Lots of debate of various kinds on AI at the moment, I know from my own social media that many consider it an abomination, while others see it as opening up creativity to people who would never have the time to actually study art in the traditonal way. Plus all the arguments about environmental costs and resource usage.
But I'm wondering, how do people feel about paying for content, especially AI-generated content? Hence this poll.
Feel free to comment if the poll options don't cover what you want to say.
Disclaimer: While I'm interested in AI personally, all WAM photos and videos at Saturation Hall, Langstonedale, and our download stores, are strictly real-world, real-people only. We do absolutely minimal editing, and everything we present is as it really happened, and we intend to keep it that way. This post is to foster debate and for curiosity, we have no intention of trying to sell AI-generated content ourselves.
But I'm wondering, how do people feel about paying for content, especially AI-generated content? Hence this poll.
Feel free to comment if the poll options don't cover what you want to say.
Disclaimer: While I'm interested in AI personally, all WAM photos and videos at Saturation Hall, Langstonedale, and our download stores, are strictly real-world, real-people only. We do absolutely minimal editing, and everything we present is as it really happened, and we intend to keep it that way. This post is to foster debate and for curiosity, we have no intention of trying to sell AI-generated content ourselves.Saturation Hall - Forth! The Gungemaidens!
I spend thousands of dollars and do weeks of casting, screening, planning, and writing to shoot WAM with real models. I wake up at the crack of dawn to prepare for the shoot, and spend hours cleaning up and tearing down well after they're gone. I'm pushing 40 and need a day to lay in bed to recover from all that. And then comes the editing.
If someone were able to create stuff like what I shoot with the same quality and detail simply using AI, I'd just send my money to them and save my body and mind the trouble of doing it myself. And yet, I still do it myself...
If someone were able to create stuff like what I shoot with the same quality and detail simply using AI, I'd just send my money to them and save my body and mind the trouble of doing it myself. And yet, I still do it myself...
Check out Project 20M on IG! @Project20M
My own personal fetish is incredibly niche, that niche I'm probably one of the only persons in the world to truly mix full dive gear with getting quite messy! In my situation I thought AI was possibly going to be a dream come true. To be able to generate those fantasy images that I've had in my head for probably 30 plus years.
I must admit I did try AI for a few weeks and the first week the results were a dream come true. Second week I started to feel oddly guilty somehow and the third week I stopped all together.
I realised that I had a wife that participates and I still get the chance for myself to get messy.
The ease that I was able to produce AI images was incredible and it was this ease that started to make my own fetish a little watered down and not that special anymore.
I've not gone back to AI for image generation. I realised that it was the anticipation of our next session that actually made up a good proportion of my kink. The "on tap" ability to produce a gunged up female diver started to make it not special and the result was I was finding myself not getting turned on!!
BUT.. I'm am incredibly lucky I have a wife who is prepared to get geared up and pour custard over herself. If I did not have such luck then in my incredibly specialist fetish case, it may have had a usebut I could then see it somehow destroying it.
I must admit I did try AI for a few weeks and the first week the results were a dream come true. Second week I started to feel oddly guilty somehow and the third week I stopped all together.
I realised that I had a wife that participates and I still get the chance for myself to get messy.
The ease that I was able to produce AI images was incredible and it was this ease that started to make my own fetish a little watered down and not that special anymore.
I've not gone back to AI for image generation. I realised that it was the anticipation of our next session that actually made up a good proportion of my kink. The "on tap" ability to produce a gunged up female diver started to make it not special and the result was I was finding myself not getting turned on!!
BUT.. I'm am incredibly lucky I have a wife who is prepared to get geared up and pour custard over herself. If I did not have such luck then in my incredibly specialist fetish case, it may have had a usebut I could then see it somehow destroying it.
Videos are getting more impressive (though it makes me laugh that people *still* generate people with that stupid sheen-y skin look - that will never be impressive. The one time I tried AI last year, my first curious attempt, I started the prompt with create "a photo of...", and immediately got a life-like looking woman in the result, none of the uncanny 3D sheen. I can't believe the amount of people that hasn't occured to and I nailed it first bounce. And gave up with AI within two days)
I like seeing people get messy for their looks and personality that I can recognise. For the reaction only they would have. I've got a (non-wam) custom in the works right now, and a wam one planned for early next year because I want something with those models. That will never change. AI content simply doesn't make me feel anything.
I like seeing people get messy for their looks and personality that I can recognise. For the reaction only they would have. I've got a (non-wam) custom in the works right now, and a wam one planned for early next year because I want something with those models. That will never change. AI content simply doesn't make me feel anything.
johnnypie said: When AI get advanced enough, and it will get there, no one will have to pay anyone for anything. They'll create their own WAM dream videos themselves with simple prompts.
You are certainly optimistic about the human race. Someone, somewhere will make money off of it. You can sit at your computer and input your fantasy, but you will likely need to pay for access.
Regardless, this is close to truth. AI is coming and coming fast and you can hate it all you want but it will take over.
The intermediary step, for the entrepreneur, is appealing to lazy/dumb folks like me who can't be sussed to deal with AI. Here is how it will work: I go to a site and input my WAM fantasy and pay a fee, out comes a very realistic video. I don't have the time or inclination to figure out the "in-between stuff" -- I just want to tell someone, "Make this scene" and have it come out great.
That is where Wammers who are experimenting with AI have an opportunity. You are good with the AI tool? Great! But I am not paying for content you dream up -- I want bespoke content. Enable that for old, lazy dudes like me and you will make money, even in a niche fetish like WAM.
Real people doing wam is the whole appeal for me. With AI, I suppose I'd save a lot of money if it took over the WAM scene because I wouldn't be buying any scenes. I don't care if my biggest wam fantasy was wonderfully recreated by AI, it would do nothing for me at all.
skirtpie said: AI should be a blessing for WAM enthusiasts.
Nah, It's really not. The human element, the emotions involved, spontaneity, learning curve and probability of error is what makes Creating, and exploring WAM exciting. The anticipation, the wait, the build, the tension, the aftermath, all of it. My muscles still ache from the heavy lifting involved but I regret none of it
I have built real lasting connections with real people through shooting our content and shared experiences. Connections that exist til this day. Good luck saying that with an AI prompt.
Making smut is easy. Making art takes more!
If I have scenes in my brain that legit will never happen, cost, availability, etc, I still have the urge to see them, even if they are AI. I see some mud based clips from AI Divinity that would never happen IRL. Camera angle, logistics, etc. I'm happy they exist in the world, even if they are not real.
For me, WAM is partly about experiencing the range of emotions, sensations, the excitement or humiliation of actually getting messy.
Knowing that someone I'm looking at actually felt the apprehension, the fun, the erotisisim or whatever they felt as they got messy is something that is important. AI can never replace that, as it never happened in an AI image.
Knowing that someone I'm looking at actually felt the apprehension, the fun, the erotisisim or whatever they felt as they got messy is something that is important. AI can never replace that, as it never happened in an AI image.
I don't know why you'd bother with a poll like this. It's the same answers every time.
At least 90% of AI content is complete crap.
I know for a fact that people will pay for it if you can make stuff that isn't complete crap.
Unfortunately, people making AI content can't see the limitations of what they have created. Most people don't have the technical knowledge to make good stuff. They don't know how to train a Lora, or use ComfyUI. They lack a critical eye and will post almost anything they generate. They lack moral judgement and will publish stuff featuring real people.
At least 90% of AI content is complete crap.
I know for a fact that people will pay for it if you can make stuff that isn't complete crap.
Unfortunately, people making AI content can't see the limitations of what they have created. Most people don't have the technical knowledge to make good stuff. They don't know how to train a Lora, or use ComfyUI. They lack a critical eye and will post almost anything they generate. They lack moral judgement and will publish stuff featuring real people.
I was creating AI wam images, and then videos. (there are still many in my profile) It got boring fast, because I could never get exactly what I was imagining, and of course the reactions were not very realistic, nor the way the mess would fall or spread out.
I mainly used AI to create scenarios that would be impossible to create with real people. (such as an entire town being wiped out by a mudslide which curiously didn't cause any injuries, only lots of nice mud) Even that was a far stretch of the imagination. So I eventually lost interest. I still dabble from time to time, but I don't see much improvement in the results. I'm far more interested in the real thing, watching actual women getting messy in videos. Even better is enjoying wam with my wife who loves getting messy with me.
So I've lost most of my interest in AI for now, and possibly forever, but I'll still check in once in a while to see if things have improved much. In my opinion, it burst on the scene, had a huge improvement, but has remained much the same for a while now. Give me the real thing.
I mainly used AI to create scenarios that would be impossible to create with real people. (such as an entire town being wiped out by a mudslide which curiously didn't cause any injuries, only lots of nice mud) Even that was a far stretch of the imagination. So I eventually lost interest. I still dabble from time to time, but I don't see much improvement in the results. I'm far more interested in the real thing, watching actual women getting messy in videos. Even better is enjoying wam with my wife who loves getting messy with me.
So I've lost most of my interest in AI for now, and possibly forever, but I'll still check in once in a while to see if things have improved much. In my opinion, it burst on the scene, had a huge improvement, but has remained much the same for a while now. Give me the real thing.
johnnypie said: This "I'm not going to support AI" attitude will be a non-starter, since over time you won't be able to tell if what you're buying is a real studio with models or it's AI generated.
That depends whether there's a site policy and/or legal requirement to declare when content is AI generated. If there is (like the current policy on the UMD), the only confusion will come from people like skirtpie who deliberately and repeatedly lie about how they made photos/videos.
We should not be using AI for anything related to this. AI being allowed on here in my mind is insulting to producers and models. It is saying your hard work, talent, skillset, dedication etc. is meaningless because I can just take an AI generator and make the same thing you are the way I want. People who think custom prices are outrageous are running to AI because they do not care about the work the people that make the content do. All they care about is what can make them cum the cheapest.
RobbyWLP said: The reason many producers hate A.I. (and it's understandable) is like the Photomats of old, A.I. will eventually hurt their business. But also like the Photomats that disappeared with the introduction of digital photography, there's no way to stop it. Also, like digital photography replacing film, it's just going to get better.
People hate change, especially when it directly affects them.
As some here have correctly observed, it's just a matter of time before "Full WAM Fantasy" becomes a reality.
Being able to see any woman or man pied and slimed in any manner you wish, plus perhaps the individual actually participating in the scene they created is just this side of Star Trek's Holodeck. Also, while you can't sell everything and anything due to copyright law, for personal use you can create literally anything you want with anyone you want. There's a lot of people who would prefer "participating" to just watching.
How many times over the years have you seen people here say "She can pie ME anytime!"
Well, now, "she" can.
Robby
People hate change, especially when it directly affects them.
As some here have correctly observed, it's just a matter of time before "Full WAM Fantasy" becomes a reality.
Being able to see any woman or man pied and slimed in any manner you wish, plus perhaps the individual actually participating in the scene they created is just this side of Star Trek's Holodeck. Also, while you can't sell everything and anything due to copyright law, for personal use you can create literally anything you want with anyone you want. There's a lot of people who would prefer "participating" to just watching.
How many times over the years have you seen people here say "She can pie ME anytime!"
Well, now, "she" can.
Robby
Well you've definitely sparked a lively debate in the non-wam forum.
Following on from my previous comment, here's an analogy.
I'm a vegetarian, i.e. I've made an ethical choice not to eat meat. In some cases, it's easy for me to identify meat (e.g. a steak). In other cases, the veggie substitutes are very convincing (e.g. I can't tell the difference between Quorn nuggets and chicken nuggets), so I rely on the people selling the food to label it.
A few times, I've been in a situation where I've been given meat by mistake. E.g. I've ordered a mushroom pizza but it has chunks of ham on it. Accidents can happen, and if they apologise and replace the food then I won't make a big deal out of it. However, suppose that they said "Stop whining, just pick those bits off if you don't want to eat them." I wouldn't be happy, and I wouldn't eat there again. If they deliberately mislabelled food to trick vegetarians into eating meat, I'd be very unhappy.
Now suppose there was a location (e.g. a conference centre) with lots of food vendors. If I reported a food vendor for mislabelling food, and the site owners said "We'll change the label on that item, but we're happy for them to keep selling food here", I probably wouldn't buy food from anyone else at that site, because I wouldn't be able to trust that their labels are accurate (unless I know the food vendor personally).
In the case of AI, some people object to it based on quality, and I'm willing to believe that this might improve to be more convincing. However, other people object to it on ethical grounds (e.g. environmental impact and plagiarism). In those circumstances, they'd want the people selling a video to be clear about whether it's AI generated. If a producer lies about the origins and gets found out, some customers won't buy from that producer anymore. If the site owner (e.g. UMD or Vidown) says "We'll change the tags for that specific video but we won't take any other action against the producer" then some customers won't buy from any other producers at that site anymore.
I'm a vegetarian, i.e. I've made an ethical choice not to eat meat. In some cases, it's easy for me to identify meat (e.g. a steak). In other cases, the veggie substitutes are very convincing (e.g. I can't tell the difference between Quorn nuggets and chicken nuggets), so I rely on the people selling the food to label it.
A few times, I've been in a situation where I've been given meat by mistake. E.g. I've ordered a mushroom pizza but it has chunks of ham on it. Accidents can happen, and if they apologise and replace the food then I won't make a big deal out of it. However, suppose that they said "Stop whining, just pick those bits off if you don't want to eat them." I wouldn't be happy, and I wouldn't eat there again. If they deliberately mislabelled food to trick vegetarians into eating meat, I'd be very unhappy.
Now suppose there was a location (e.g. a conference centre) with lots of food vendors. If I reported a food vendor for mislabelling food, and the site owners said "We'll change the label on that item, but we're happy for them to keep selling food here", I probably wouldn't buy food from anyone else at that site, because I wouldn't be able to trust that their labels are accurate (unless I know the food vendor personally).
In the case of AI, some people object to it based on quality, and I'm willing to believe that this might improve to be more convincing. However, other people object to it on ethical grounds (e.g. environmental impact and plagiarism). In those circumstances, they'd want the people selling a video to be clear about whether it's AI generated. If a producer lies about the origins and gets found out, some customers won't buy from that producer anymore. If the site owner (e.g. UMD or Vidown) says "We'll change the tags for that specific video but we won't take any other action against the producer" then some customers won't buy from any other producers at that site anymore.
flank said: In the case of AI, some people object to it based on quality, and I'm willing to believe that this might improve to be more convincing. However, other people object to it on ethical grounds (e.g. environmental impact and plagiarism). In those circumstances, they'd want the people selling a video to be clear about whether it's AI generated. If a producer lies about the origins and gets found out, some customers won't buy from that producer anymore. If the site owner (e.g. UMD or Vidown) says "We'll change the tags for that specific video but we won't take any other action against the producer" then some customers won't buy from any other producers at that site anymore.
A VERY similar discussion is happening in the Non-WAM section concerning Robby and Al.
flank said: Following on from my previous comment, here's an analogy.
I'm a vegetarian, i.e. I've made an ethical choice not to eat meat. In some cases, it's easy for me to identify meat (e.g. a steak). In other cases, the veggie substitutes are very convincing (e.g. I can't tell the difference between Quorn nuggets and chicken nuggets), so I rely on the people selling the food to label it.
A few times, I've been in a situation where I've been given meat by mistake. E.g. I've ordered a mushroom pizza but it has chunks of ham on it. Accidents can happen, and if they apologise and replace the food then I won't make a big deal out of it. However, suppose that they said "Stop whining, just pick those bits off if you don't want to eat them." I wouldn't be happy, and I wouldn't eat there again. If they deliberately mislabelled food to trick vegetarians into eating meat, I'd be very unhappy.
Now suppose there was a location (e.g. a conference centre) with lots of food vendors. If I reported a food vendor for mislabelling food, and the site owners said "We'll change the label on that item, but we're happy for them to keep selling food here", I probably wouldn't buy food from anyone else at that site, because I wouldn't be able to trust that their labels are accurate (unless I know the food vendor personally).
In the case of AI, some people object to it based on quality, and I'm willing to believe that this might improve to be more convincing. However, other people object to it on ethical grounds (e.g. environmental impact and plagiarism). In those circumstances, they'd want the people selling a video to be clear about whether it's AI generated. If a producer lies about the origins and gets found out, some customers won't buy from that producer anymore. If the site owner (e.g. UMD or Vidown) says "We'll change the tags for that specific video but we won't take any other action against the producer" then some customers won't buy from any other producers at that site anymore.
I'm a vegetarian, i.e. I've made an ethical choice not to eat meat. In some cases, it's easy for me to identify meat (e.g. a steak). In other cases, the veggie substitutes are very convincing (e.g. I can't tell the difference between Quorn nuggets and chicken nuggets), so I rely on the people selling the food to label it.
A few times, I've been in a situation where I've been given meat by mistake. E.g. I've ordered a mushroom pizza but it has chunks of ham on it. Accidents can happen, and if they apologise and replace the food then I won't make a big deal out of it. However, suppose that they said "Stop whining, just pick those bits off if you don't want to eat them." I wouldn't be happy, and I wouldn't eat there again. If they deliberately mislabelled food to trick vegetarians into eating meat, I'd be very unhappy.
Now suppose there was a location (e.g. a conference centre) with lots of food vendors. If I reported a food vendor for mislabelling food, and the site owners said "We'll change the label on that item, but we're happy for them to keep selling food here", I probably wouldn't buy food from anyone else at that site, because I wouldn't be able to trust that their labels are accurate (unless I know the food vendor personally).
In the case of AI, some people object to it based on quality, and I'm willing to believe that this might improve to be more convincing. However, other people object to it on ethical grounds (e.g. environmental impact and plagiarism). In those circumstances, they'd want the people selling a video to be clear about whether it's AI generated. If a producer lies about the origins and gets found out, some customers won't buy from that producer anymore. If the site owner (e.g. UMD or Vidown) says "We'll change the tags for that specific video but we won't take any other action against the producer" then some customers won't buy from any other producers at that site anymore.
A very interesting analogy especially since the vegetarian manufacturers are suing the gov't/states for their truth in advertising laws regarding food. They want their fake meat to be called "hot dogs, burgers, pork, jerky" in order to trick customers into believing that their plant garbage is actual meat. So I'm for truth.
RobbyWLP said: The reason many producers hate A.I. (and it's understandable) is like the Photomats of old, A.I. will eventually hurt their business. But also like the Photomats that disappeared with the introduction of digital photography, there's no way to stop it. Also, like digital photography replacing film, it's just going to get better.
People hate change, especially when it directly affects them.
As some here have correctly observed, it's just a matter of time before "Full WAM Fantasy" becomes a reality.
Being able to see any woman or man pied and slimed in any manner you wish, plus perhaps the individual actually participating in the scene they created is just this side of Star Trek's Holodeck. Also, while you can't sell everything and anything due to copyright law, for personal use you can create literally anything you want with anyone you want. There's a lot of people who would prefer "participating" to just watching.
How many times over the years have you seen people here say "She can pie ME anytime!"
Well, now, "she" can.
Robby
People hate change, especially when it directly affects them.
As some here have correctly observed, it's just a matter of time before "Full WAM Fantasy" becomes a reality.
Being able to see any woman or man pied and slimed in any manner you wish, plus perhaps the individual actually participating in the scene they created is just this side of Star Trek's Holodeck. Also, while you can't sell everything and anything due to copyright law, for personal use you can create literally anything you want with anyone you want. There's a lot of people who would prefer "participating" to just watching.
How many times over the years have you seen people here say "She can pie ME anytime!"
Well, now, "she" can.
Robby
Producers don't hate AI and you would be surprised how many use it on a minor level. But we do hate
-people who abuse it and use it to create AI fantasies of real people who never asked to be put in that situation
-people who ignore consent
-unscrupulous "producers" who will slide fine print to use a model's likeness in perpetuity for AI purposes
AI, in and of itself is harmless. I use AI for automating my photo editing and video editing workflows, color corrections and denoise. It's the people who misuse it we don't like.
Making smut is easy. Making art takes more!
johnnypie said: The goal is to protect models. The fear at the moment isn't necessarily AI models - we have a ways to go before that concern - it's about AI slop becoming rampant in fetish communities causing a decline in sales = less bookings.
We may or may not get that far. I still think we are one good court case away from it being enforced on a level similarly to age verification if it keeps up, maybe even federally.
Just remember the AI software companies (much less the courts) do not care a bit about your porn and the real prize is government contracts or Software support like Adobe. They will happily give up civilian use if it means a partnership with BAE Systems or Lockheed aerospace.
Making smut is easy. Making art takes more!
I'm sorry, but AI will never ever actually get good enough to replace the real thing, and people keep saying, it'll get better, and yes it probably will get better, but it will never look realistic enough to fool me. I've never been fooled by anything AI because if I look at it for more than a few seconds it becomes obvious that it isn't real or that it's fake. The thing is AI is very limited in what it can convincingly do but the more complicated something is the harder time AI has in doing it. Also as someone who's flirted with using AI a little it's not something you can just plug a prompt into and get something good out of it, you need to babysit it to do anything good, and most of the time it doesn't save any time, in order to make something good I needed to spend way more time on trying to get the AI into doing it than it would've done to do it myself, and that hasn't changed in the year since I first tried it. It's still just as bad at doing what I want it to do and it has not improved at all.
johnnypie said: The goal is to protect models. The fear at the moment isn't necessarily AI models - we have a ways to go before that concern - it's about AI slop becoming rampant in fetish communities causing a decline in sales = less bookings.
I think now is the time to be concerned with where AI is going and establishing policies for it. In a year or so it will be too late and we will be in a reactive place instead of a proactive place.
If the producers I am a fan of start trying to sell ai content, I would be disappointed and unfollow.
(Not cancel culture, but it just my preference for what I see in my notifications)
(Not cancel culture, but it just my preference for what I see in my notifications)
No matter how impressive AI becomes I don't think I will ever find it erotic. Just knowing that it is not real eliminates the spark required to set the fire. Even in its current state, I have seen some pretty impressive stuff but I have never had a lustful reaction. It's Possible to find it admirable without finding it desirable
RobbyWLP said: Isn't that almost verbatim what film photographers originally said about digital photography? I'm sure some still do. But it's now accepted, published, sold, etc.
Robby
Robby
Robby, you missed the end quote LOL.
If you are going to go down the road of digital versus analog as justification and the same equation, I will go down that rabbit hole with you.
Digital did not put actors out of work. Digital did not put Cinematographers out of work. Digital did not put writers out of work. Digital did not put best boys and key grips out of work. Digital did not put directors out of work. Digital did not put Choreographers out of work. Digital did not put make up artists out of work. Digital did not put costume designers out of work. Digital did not put set designers out of work. Digital did not put location scouts out of work. Digital did not put editors out of work. There are more jobs that I just don't know about or can't think of that have to do with making movies and videos.
ALL of the jobs I listed in my paragraph will be put out of work with the advancement of AI. The producers were the only ones I could think of that would still have jobs because AI has yet to solve the money issue with making a movie. Every other job listed is either obsolete when you use AI, or replaced by AI.
RobbyWLP said:
Isn't that almost verbatim what film photographers originally said about digital photography? I'm sure some still do. But it's now accepted, published, sold, etc.
Robby
dalamar666 said: We should not be using AI for anything related to this. AI being allowed on here in my mind is insulting to producers and models.
Isn't that almost verbatim what film photographers originally said about digital photography? I'm sure some still do. But it's now accepted, published, sold, etc.
Robby
And yet DSLR and Mirrorless users have been trying to emulate look of medium format, Kodak film and Arri Alexa since their inception lol
Just because it's new, doesn't necessarily mean it's as good or better or be replaced for that matter. Film cameras are still very much alive and well and in fact, there is Minolta 35mm I have my eyes on
Making smut is easy. Making art takes more!
RobbyWLP said: I think A.I. will have it's day in a number of areas, some good, some bad, but I also believe it's going to be like Y2K in a few areas. Much ado about nothing. Already, the human contact issue is being talked about in a number of business that simply can't, or won't use A.I.
Robby
Robby
My concern with A.I. is not just around media and making content. A.I. will never replace the skills and creativity of humans. If we treated A.I. like the effects of Skynet I think we would be doing the Y2K thing. There is a second Y2K dealing with Linux that has different applications because of how the interaction is with Linux, but that is all different.
A.I. is going to put people out of work in worse ways than the assembly line, Amazon, Streaming etc. did. Those are comparisons that industry specific. A.I. and the way it is used and being developed and who is bribing for its development are going to shape how it is used. Streaming only replaced Blockbuster (Except Bend OR), Hollywood Video etc. But A.I. will replace people in every profession out there. This is not just limited to our little corner of the world. For me, if I can fight in our little corner of the world against it I will.
All that said, the work being done with A.I. on restoring movies with the upscaling has been pretty good. The way that Paul and Ringo used A.I. to mix John's song and put in some of George to give us an unreleased Beatles song was amazing. That is where I am personally torn. Because the advancements of the uses of A.I. that I can appreciate require the use of A.I. that I don't like or agree with.
Sponsors
Sponsors
Design & Code ©1998-2025 Loverbuns, LLC 18 U.S.C. 2257 Record-Keeping Requirements Compliance Statement
Epoch Billing Support Log In