This has gotten stupid. I agree with you overall. I'm against AI slop and the problems that come with it. But this is a direct response to an AI generated thing in the political news. The desired goal isn't possible without it looking like the original it is a parody of. I didn't make it. I found it, or more accurately, a friend sent it to me. It existed regardless of my actions.

I shared it because it would make any Trump defender instantly see why the original was a problem because of its subject matter even if they thought it was fine before.

I'm not going to argue any pro AI in gender stance. But I will point out a bad or lazy argument and your 2 million gallons a day thing was so disproportionate to the scale of this one piece that it deserved to be pinged out.

Hate AI, I'm probably with you on 99.99% of your stance. But don't argue with me using bad arguments. Don't blame me for it existing. Don't assume I think I'm a hero (that argument doesn't even make sense). This whole conversation is like the Narcissism of Small Differences brought to life and it's dull.

One image is less environmentally and socially impactful to energy and water resources than shipping seven tubes of paint and a canvas halfway around the world and you know it. To argue otherwise is disingenuous.

End this because it's wasting both our time. Go argue with someone who actually wants AI and uses it. Go find the person that put the prompt in to create this one. Go plant a tree. But find something productive to do because I already agree with you too much for you to make any progress with.