The thing is, different people find different things annoying, and different people find different things tiresome. And different people like different things.

I hate most AI. The majority of AI imagery I see on this site sucks, and the AI WAM I see on YouTube is even worse. I can count on one hand the number of people who are doing good stuff with it. I can see why most people won't buy AI scenes and I can see why most people think it is awful.

But 19% is a significant minority. Skirtpie is clearly able to make what works for him with AI. He doesn't need it to work for anyone else, it's just for him. His opinion on this AI focused thread is perfectly valid and on topic. The fact you find him annoying has everything to do with skirtpie and nothing to do with AI.

We are all different people. Just because one person used images without consent, it doesn't mean we all do. Just because one person claims it's the best thing ever, it doesn't mean we all do. What if we applied that same way of thinking to real WAM producers? If you're rhetorically rolling up all "AI proponents" into one singular blob, then what, rhetorically, makes any real WAM producer different to Leon, or "Kelsey Rose", and so on? Do you get me?

I agree that the best uses for AI are in things like video editing; automating existing processes that take hours manually. But we're going to need to let people using generative AI just be. The resistance that skirtpie mentioned does seem overblown when you look at what it actually is, a series of semi-realistic cartoons, simple images to represent his fantasy.

What I find tiresome is the very moment AI is mentioned, regardless of context, certain people feel obliged to comment "AI does nothing for me", as if this is a useful input. I get that it's still new and people are worried it's going to take over, but as a community we need to move past this. We already know that 81% of this site's users don't like AI. It's like me commenting "pies do nothing for me" on any thread about pie recipes: it's correct, but it's not useful. We could get a little better at not fanning the flames.

I'm really no following the "people want reality" aspect of this argument. Start Wars isn't real but it's a multi-billion dollar franchise with rabid fans. What else is absolutely huge? Anime and if you don't think people are jacking off to basically cartoons, well.....they are. How many will care that an AI WAM video isn't real if it satisfies their fantasies? Well, producers are about to find out real soon.

The part you're not following is people don't want AI wam. It seems like you want everyone to pretend it's real and disassociate. Most people dont want to pretend a digital program is a woman. They want to see actual women doing actual messy things. Star wars is a science fiction film. Wam is fetish porn, the correlation is not the same.

You're speaking for a lot of wammers who are right now prompting "Madison Beer vs Olivia Rodrigo pie and slime fight"

No, I'm speaking for the majority of wammers who have voting repeatedly in multiple polls on this forum and been very vocal in posts, even in this very thread, they don't want AI wam. I don't understand why people are trying so hard to force it on everybody. We don't want to pretend a digital woman is real.

Your false premise comes from thinking this board represents the WAM community. I'd say, at best, about one half of one percent of all Wammers are even on this forum. After that, 20 members make up 95% of all posts.

I think Johnny is hitting the nail on the head with producers finding out soon. There are a couple of situations I can see happening that will bring AI more to the forefront. You have the people that have very specific wants from WAM. Some of their wants are being met or is close enough but still not scratching that itch. They might have looked into customs to scratch that specific itch and found that they are not in their financial reach and will turn to AI. Or, they have ordered customs in the past and they haven't been quite what they were expecting. Maybe a script wasn't followed etc. They will turn to AI to get every little detail they are wanting.

The other group of people are those who buy sets from producers that they like, but inflation and other things are happening and those sales will start falling off once people start weighing the cost of AI WAM vs real WAM. Those folks won't be going to AI WAM because it is better necessarily, but because it is cheaper. This will unfortunately lead to producers closing down shop because the sales won't be there. The frequency of sets will slowly start decreasing. Then will come the announcement that after X years of making content they are closing down shop because they cannot compete with AI that is basically free and takes no skill.

I don't think that people should be allowed to sell AI sets here. AI upscaling to make older content better quality content does not fall in this category to me. That is not AI generated. There is no skill required to make AI WAM. People should not be profiting here from something that has no cost to them to produce. Showing off something you created, or designing scenes you would like to see, sure I guess. But selling it, hell no.

With that same logic, speaking for the other 99.5% and saying they're all making AI Wam videos would also be a false premise, right? Also, majority of fetish producers who specialize in wam content are on this forum. Granted there's thousands of fetish producers out there, who do have wam content on their respected sites but it's not their focus.

So if their main consumer base is on this forum and are the same base voting on these polls, month after month, being the majority not wanting AI content, from a business standpoint, why go against what the consumers are literally telling you what they want? Basic product research is saying it's the wrong direction. Most people in the consumer base on this forum don't want to pretend a digital program is a woman.

Also 252 votes on this very post is people saying they don't want AI wam. So it's a lot more than just 20 members making up each post.

That might set a weird precedent. E.g. suppose that I said "Here's a video of my girlfriend rolling around in the mud". It didn't cost me anything to make the video (if we were already in a muddy field) and there's no particular skill involved in using a mobile phone to record it. Should that video also be banned, because it's unfair to the people who hire models and set up proper sound/lighting for their mud videos?

On the flipside, suppose that the AI companies start charging people more to make videos. Is it then ok to sell those videos here, because it cost something to produce?

(Just to be clear, I'm not in favour of AI videos, but that's nothing to do with the skill/cost involved in making them.)

I see this conversation as a room full of Blackberry execs laughing at the announcement of the iPhone.

How about iPhone execs laughing at the announcement of the Windows phone?

If you look online, you can find photos of Microsoft employees holding a fake funeral for the iPhone in 2010, and things didn't turn out the way they'd hoped.

The point is that none of us know what will happen. You can cherry-pick examples of new technology that almost eradicated what came before, and I can pick examples of new technology that never lived up to its original hype (e.g. 3D TV). But none of those examples prove anything about the future of generative AI.

if you post pictures of your girlfriend rolling around in the mud, as long as you have her consent, you're not hurting anyone. that's kind of the purpose of the community. sometimes the freebies draw those who are curious and can actually help those trying to make a living. if you post images created by ai using images of models, or images based the likeness of models, you are robbing them of the opportunity to make income based on their 'brand' and/or likeness. you would also be putting them in the position of endorsing whatever kink you are into whether they want to or not. so not cool.

personally, i wouldn't download any ai. 1s and 0s are not sexy. i don't care how 'real' it appears. i want my credits to say produced by messygirl.com not rendered by r2d2. a big part of my 'kink' includes the fact that there are real models hopefully enjoying making these videos as much as i enjoy watching them. and i checked and i could have use two more ' before this post would be considered pretentious.

Have you tried shooting a video on your phone and then editing it into a decent looking clip and uploading? It is not as easy as you think. I have used my phone to edit together video and there were a few things I had to learn to use. It is nothing I would even feel right monitizing in any way shape or form. There is nothing wrong with using your wife. A lot of people here use their significant others as partners. But to think that there would be people charging money to watch a raw footage from a cell phone?

There are 2 costs I look at. The cost of the skills and the cost of the shoot (models, supplies, etc). AI does not have any of those costs. Yes I know cooling and shit costs money. I also know that electricity consumers shoulder some of that cost. Either through the tax incentives that the company gets to operate, or because of the massive power requirements without upgrading the grid means that there is less electricity for consumers. Because you know they will not make companies follow black out schedules.

I suppose it depends on what you view UMD as *for* and what it's supposed to be. If it's exclusively intended as a storefront and any/all content which threatens the likelihood of purchases for producers is prohibited then fair enough. I think it sits more generally as a wam site, with forums and a video archive, which makes banning a specific type of content purely because it could compete with producers to be a bit less justifiable - at that point, why not ban youtube links?

i'm not for banning anything. check my post, there is no mention of it anywhere, even the original post has no mention of banning anything. if someone wants to post ai images of themselves or altered images of others with their permission, and other are interested in those images, that's their world and i live just outside it. but if people are altering images or using ai to create likenesses of real-life people, without consent, i believe they are crossing an ethical line.

R2D2 went straight into the mud in Empire Strikes Back. Secret wammer?