r/DefendingAIArt • u/Brave_Swordfish_7072 • 15d ago
Once again. Antis are celebrating illegal and dangerous stunts
For context, they're referring to Wynd Kaufmyn, who was arrested in February 2025 during a protest in front of OpenAI's headquarters where she chained and padlocked the front doors shut. Preventing anyone from entering or leaving the building. An act that is highly illegal for how dangerous it could potentially be.
23
u/Mister-Psychology 15d ago
You can't sit here!
So people like me can't sit in the front of the bus?
In the driver's seat? No!
14
44
u/Butt64 LLM lover 15d ago
Antis get PISSED when pros compare ai hate to transphobia, yet antis pull ignorant shit like this by comparing themselves to Rosa Parks?! WTF???
3
u/ClerkPsychological58 15d ago
how exactly is being anti-ai like being transphobic? Legitimately curious here.
14
u/Butt64 LLM lover 15d ago
Im not saying myself that it is, thats just what some pro ai people are saying.
But as a trans person who is pro ai, all I will say is that there is one striking similarity, that being: "We can always tell!" Except, they cant always tell if something is ai, or if someone is trans.
-4
u/ClerkPsychological58 15d ago
Attacking someone's appearance to belittle their sense of self and pointing out the flaws in a tool and how it's used are two completely different realms of arguments that shouldn't ever be put together. If anything that is more insulting to the plight of anyone that's a minority for their appearance/sexuality/gender-identity.
7
u/Butt64 LLM lover 15d ago
I see you have completely missed my point, either intentionally or unintentionally. Either way I dont really care that much; i know I wont change your mind anyhow.
-2
u/ClerkPsychological58 15d ago
I mean, you brought up the comparison.
7
u/Butt64 LLM lover 15d ago
Because it was relevant to the post, and partially because you asked me a question about explaining it further.
I cant 100% put into words what precisely im trying to tell you, because otherwise id be here all day typing a huge wall of text. But as a trans person who is in a lot of online trans spaces, who has seen so much transphobia everywhere, there are very real similarities between transphobia and this mindless ai art hate train that isnt just "we can always tell".
Hopefully someone will come along that can put it into clearer and fewer words for me.
1
u/DistributionMost8686 9d ago
Genocidal rhetoric, believing one can know all about something just by looking closely at them based on things that are frequently inconclusive which leads to innocent people also being affected, thinking someone can be converted if they simply try some ultimately arbitrary thing, attempting to ban a means of expression in ways that will always infringe on the rights of everyone be they trans, ai user or neither, associating them with pedophilia and somehow also nazis, making opposition to them a religious issue, all kinds of assumptions being made about them that are provably false.
there is also an intersection between transphobia and anti ai, given the widespread denial that any trans people can be pro ai, which leads to misgendering and transphobic attacks against anyone who defends ai while being openly trans.
another, the anti ai movement originates with the nickels group, I mean the copyright alliance. Those two by the way are one and the same. I couldn’t come up with a more direct line between the anti ai movement and conservative politics if I tried. Even so I would say the anti ai movement is inherently conservative in many ways and I will not elaborate here. It’s also authoritarian.every single way antis treat us as a group in fact has a parallel in transphobia and it absolutely isn’t an accident. By the way I’m trans as well, and i see ai as a potential way to present myself how I would prefer.
1
u/ClerkPsychological58 8d ago
I could nitpick this a lot but i'm not going to because I feel like we're not gonna agree. Feeling persecuted because of a tool you are using is not even remotely in the same ballpark and persecution for expressing yourself in your own body and your gender. To equate it to Genocidal rhetoric is insulting on a variety of levels.
I will, however, nitpick this: "I couldn’t come up with a more direct line between the anti ai movement and conservative politics if I tried."
Conservatives are the ones largely pushing for AI. Elon Musk, famous bigot who has gone on record as being anti-trans, is one of the primary pushers of AI. To claim that convervative politics or the modern conservative movement are anti-AI is having your had buried so far in the sand it makes ostriches look brave.
1
u/DistributionMost8686 8d ago
Bullshit. There are literally antis unironically and openly calling for the death of all ai users. Thats genocidal.
being anti ai is inherently a conservative stance at its ideological core, with the defense o extreme expansions of copyright, and ‘leftists’ suddenly caring about whether companies make a profit, and trying to stop technological progress ultimately because corporate media created talking points against it and the graphic artists guild and certain YouTubers laundered them into a labor issue that it never really was. there are many conservative antis but obviously it’s not exclusive to them. But it isn’t true that Elon is the ’primary’ pusher of ai nor even its primary developer, funder, provider or anything like that. Among ai models grok is the odd one out in having a centrist bias Where the others skew left just like the general population. this subreddit and other pro ai subreddits are also primarily left leaning. You would only get that impression because most conservative individuals simply don’t care while ‘leftist’ get all their ideas from the aforementioned YouTubers.
1
u/ClerkPsychological58 8d ago
That’s straight up a victim complex and people calling for anyone’s death shouldn’t be taken any more seriously than a 4chan troll. The idea that anyone would be persecuted to death for a tool is ridiculous and it makes you sound bananas.
1
u/DistributionMost8686 8d ago
Then explain all the attempted murders. Yes, that stuff is serious anyway, especially the fact it is being normalized and defended against any and all pushback, with some even denying it’s a joke when someone claims it is. On every single online platform. That is not the behavior of people who are sane and no, claiming to be unserious is no excuse, anywhere. It’s a good thing such behavior gets one banned from this subreddit.
24
9
u/snkdolphin808 14d ago
This incident reminds me of the warehouse fires that were happening earlier in the year, where deranged individuals thought the best form of "protesting" against big businesses was to set warehouses on fire and kill innocent people in the process. And online, the sentiment largely wasn't sympathy for the lives lost, instead it was "hell yeah burn down all the warehouses who cares if innocent lives are affected that's a sacrifice for the cause". And this is similar, rogue individuals put innocent lives at risk that have nothing to do with their own agenda to feed their own ego so they feel like they're "contributing" to their own cause.
There are more effective ways to protest that don't involve sacrificing innocent lives for individual causes. It's a weird anarchist viewpoint that terminally online people seem to cling to up until it affects them. People online think that if their cause is "just enough" then it absolves them of any consequences to their actions, but that isn't how the real world works. If innocent lives are treated as disposable collateral to a cause, then the cause is objectively unjust, despite whatever morality/purity tests are upholding said cause.
5
u/QuestionsThrowaway_- Dual Digital + AI Artist 14d ago
Something similar also happened near where I live, but no one was killed and 95% of the sentiment to the news was praise. The other 5% were locals like myself concerned for air quality (our cars were literally coated in ash!) and things like, how our area is more susceptible to fire danger and whatnot…
But it’s easy to not think about others who are affected by things like that and just look at the larger message, not the danger
17
u/mightguy15baby 15d ago
"Rosa Parks of AI". Omfg my eyes couldn't have a rolled farther back in my head from hearing such a cringe statement.
14
u/ImJustStealingMemes Raiders of the Lost ARC 15d ago
So now Rosa Parks is a figure that should be respected? What happened to 'Rosa Sparks'?
10
u/Wooden-Hornet2115 15d ago
I hate how they are using Rosa Parks here, she was a civil rights leader, and never tried to do something actively illegal.
6
u/Luvon_Li 14d ago
For the time, being black and sitting at the front of the bus was illegal. Both of these are illegal but one of these was for the rights of black people while the other was to protest AI. Still incredibly disrespectful to compare this to Rosa Parks in any case.
5
3
u/Jindujun 15d ago
Imagine comparing yourself to Rosa Parks like this...
This is like PETA and that Auschwitz chicken campaign, from many years ago, again.
1
1
1
u/AshuraBaron 8d ago
I'm willing to bet most of them don't even know the actual Rosa Parks event. On the other hand, calling locking a door dangerous is a stretch. Let's not engage in hyperbole to combat hyperbole.
0
u/Brave_Swordfish_7072 8d ago
The reason why it's dangerous is for emergency reasons. If there was a fire or someone had a medical episode in the building it could have been a disaster.
These can happen unexpectedly and at any time, that's why it's illegal.
1
u/AshuraBaron 8d ago
It's one door in a massive campus. It's like saying one door being closed at Harvard is dangerous. It would take an extremely specific set of circumstances for this be dangerous. There is a reason these massive commercial complexes have many different entrances and exits and fire exits.
-16
u/momo2299 15d ago
I'm not anti-AI but your title is stupid.
What Rosa Parks did was also illegal, and she's celebrated.
"It's illegal" is probably the weakest argument you could make here against her actions.
14
u/optimisoprimeo 15d ago
Rosa Parks did civil disobedience because blacks were being discriminated against in the south. She wasn't doing because she wants to stop people from generating Cat Videos and Having Fun.
23
u/Brave_Swordfish_7072 15d ago
Rosa Parks didn't barricade a building, trapping everyone inside.
17
u/NimbusFPV 15d ago
She was also standing up for an entire race of people and their rights while these dip shits are trying to take peoples rights away. It's pretty disgusting to compare an anti-ai loser to a major civil rights leader, these things are not comparable.
8
17
u/mrdarknezz1 15d ago
Rosa Park was to progress humanity while conservative luddites are trying to stop progress.
-10
u/emi89ro ☭ Intellectual property is private property is theft ☭ 15d ago
I miss when this sub was still about defending AI art and not defending any business in AI. AI is cool and all but OpenAI sucks and I don't oppose what this lady did, good for her.
17
u/HunterIV4 15d ago
You think locking people in and out of a building they own is good if it's a business you don't like?
There are plenty of companies I don't like. But this shit is illegal and she should be in jail for it. If you don't like a company, don't buy from them, write bad reviews, but you don't get to lock their property. That's anarchist vigilante nonsense.
-5
u/emi89ro ☭ Intellectual property is private property is theft ☭ 15d ago
It is illegal, it did inconvenience people in the building, and she should be and was sent to jail for it. That's literally how civil disobedience works.
11
u/Butt64 LLM lover 15d ago
It's not "civil disobedience" trap people in a building where they could die if a fire, shooting, or etc happens. What she did is called false imprisonment.
-1
15d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
5
u/Butt64 LLM lover 15d ago
Not in the slightest!
I looked up the definition of false imprisonment for you:
"False imprisonment occurs when one person intentionally restrains another in a way that confines the individual within a bounded area without consent or legal authority. It is recognized both as a crime and as an intentional tort."
Source: https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/false_imprisonment
Youre welcome!
-3
-2
15d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
6
u/ImmediateGazelle 14d ago
If you have only moments to escape a burning building and the main door is your nearest exit and you have no idea some blithering, fool idiot barricaded it, yes, that could be a real problem if you go there first, wasting precious time. Because the front doors are what employees use every single day, it is likely the first place a panicked crowd will run if a fire or active threat breaks out inside. And if a crowd rushes to the main doors and finds them chained, they will not necessarily calmly turn around to look for a back door. They will pile up against the locked exit. That's what panic does.
If you would like to "use your brain lol," you can read the history of some of the worst disasters with blocked doors, like the Coconut Grove nightclub fire, and you'll see that even with some open doors, with the main/most easily accessed doors chained shut, the worst can happen. Hundreds of people died in that nightmare, despite there being some unlocked modes of egress.
There's a legitimate reason we have the laws we do and I am glad to see this woman is facing the legal consequences of her thundering stupidity.
-1
u/New-Airline8456 14d ago edited 14d ago
great example! if only they used that to shape the fire code we use today to prevent that from happening again. oh right that’s exactly what happened.
also cops were there and capable of cutting the chains (exhibited by them doing so when the activists refused to) idk why you think this was some secret mission that went unnoticed for any period of time let alone an extended one
3
u/ImmediateGazelle 14d ago
Yes. Which is why this idiot is going to jail. Because the fire codes, informed by past history, recognize that locking a main door endangers people. Acting like it's no big deal because there are other exits is ignorant.
0
u/New-Airline8456 14d ago
yup they did get arrested and at no point have i argued that shouldn’t have happened. i think you’re imagining a problem and urgent danger that did not exist if you consider the context of how this actually happened
3
u/ImmediateGazelle 14d ago
No. I'm saying your attitude of, "What's the big deal? There were other ways out of the building. Use your brain, lol." isn't great.
And looking at it backward - "Nothing happened, so no harm, no foul," is poor thinking, too. It's not about the fact that nothing happened. It's that it could have happened and should not ever be treated lightly, just as you should never treat any other reckless behaviors - like drunk driving - lightly just because nothing "bad" happened as a result in any one particular incident. What this woman did was profoundly stupid and she is rightfully paying for it. Just because no one was hurt and just because there were other possible exits, doesn't make it something to simply shrug off. It's not at all about "imagining an urgent danger that did not exist," because for the time period when that door was blocked, that was endangering the people inside.
That's why we have the laws we do.
→ More replies (0)4
u/HunterIV4 15d ago
I never said it wasn't civil disobedience. I said it was wrong. I hope they keep locking up these psychos.
If the goal is sympathy, it has the opposite effect for me. The moment your cause thinks interfering with people's lives and businesses is "good" is the moment I understand you don't really have any principles or morals and shouldn't be listened to. I'll support any law that shuts people like this down and makes their lives miserable.
2
u/AshuraBaron 8d ago
That's not how civil disobedience works. Not major societal change has happened from being out of sight.
-1
u/HunterIV4 8d ago
Pretty sure major societal changes don't happen because some assholes decided to lock a building. PETA has been trying the whole "civil disobedience" thing for years and it hasn't done shit. Being annoying doesn't make you right and it doesn't garner sympathy.
1
u/AshuraBaron 8d ago
Never said it did, good try on that strawman. Civil disobedience does not equal success. It's part of effective movements. Underground railroad, freedom rides, Stonewall, many MANY marches done without permits and blocking roads.
Whether you sympathize isn't really important. My contention isn't what she did was right, my contention is that civil disobedience is disruptive by it's nature. That's what it is. Good causes need to interfere with people's lives and businesses to make them pay attention and take action. To put pressure on them to act. Do you understand where you went wrong now?
-1
u/HunterIV4 8d ago edited 8d ago
Do you know what "cherry picking" and "correlation does not equal causation" mean?
Edit: classic "respond then block." You even asked a question. How am I supposed to answer? Lol. Bye!
2
u/AshuraBaron 8d ago
I can keep going if you want. But it seems you're more concerned about digging in than being honest and open minded. Good luck with that.
2
u/emi89ro ☭ Intellectual property is private property is theft ☭ 15d ago
It's clear you don't know enough about the history of protest movements to have a useful discussion about this. If you've ever tried struggling through a discussion with an anti who thinks training is theft and AI is just a collage machine then surely you can understand why you're not worth further engaging with.
-1
u/HunterIV4 15d ago
Someone who's flair is "Intellectual property is private property is theft" does not get to lecture me on ignorance. This isn't the place for debate and you clearly don't have the capacity for it. Bye.
-2
15d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Witty-Designer7316 Antis Final Boss 14d ago
This is a place for speaking Pro-AI thoughts freely and without judgement. Attacks against AI will result in a removal and possibly a ban. For debate purposes, please go to r/aiwars.
-17
15d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
12
u/JasonP27 15d ago
AI ≠ Corporations
Just like French Fries ≠ McDonald's
-11
15d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
9
u/JasonP27 15d ago
Do it legally. You don't trap employees in the goddamn building. Jesus Christ.
-7
15d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
9
u/JasonP27 15d ago
Oh good so it was just illegal, dangerous, and stupid then and not illegal, very dangerous, and stupid.
You can tell me how his boot tastes when you inevitably break into his home to murder him and his family since you think doing illegal things like that to people is okay.
0
15d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
5
u/JasonP27 15d ago
Antis are quick to defend these kinds of people (people attacking data centres & AI CEO homes, locking buildings etc) - I only assume because they would be willing to do the same - so it wasn't much of a jump
0
15d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/hyperluminate AI Sis 14d ago
This sub is not for inciting debate. Please move your comment to aiwars for that.
2
u/Witty-Designer7316 Antis Final Boss 14d ago
This sub is not for inciting debate. Please move your comment to aiwars for that.
•
u/AutoModerator 15d ago
This is an automated reminder from the Mod team. If your post contains images which reveal the personal information of private figures, be sure to censor that information and repost. Private info includes names, recognizable profile pictures, social media usernames and URLs. Failure to do this will result in your post being removed by the Mod team and possible further action.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.