Ethanol

I wanted to put that in the first paragraph, because so many discussions of this get derailed by further ableist gotchas about “alternatives to AI” or inspiration porn about disabled people who don’t use AI. AI could be literally useless for disabled people and yet the way you discuss it can still be ableist and use ableist rhetoric.

So many of you posit AI as something that is used by “stupid,” “lazy,” “illiterate” people who have “rotten brains.” Do I even have to point out why this is ableist? “I have no sympathy for people who are too stupid and lazy to write their own emails because their brain has turned entirely to mush” Do I really need to point it out?

Tying a person’s worth to their intellect, their productivity, their work ethic, or the output they can produce is deeply, deeply ableist.

Imagine an intellectually disabled person who cannot write emails. Maybe they cannot write at all, maybe they only need help with formal emails. Maybe they get this help from a friend, a carer, a tool, or a template. Or maybe they do not get help and therefore their email remains forever unwritten. Do you hate this person? Do you think this person is contemptible and deserves to be shunned?

“Well, that’s still no excuse to use gen AI! They should have used a template or an online guide!” This post is not about actual gen AI. This post is about how you talk about and criticize it. If your issue isn’t with people unable to write emails, then why do you keep pulling them into this? If your issue is with gen AI users, say so directly. Or better yet, spell out the specific grievance you have.

Of course, the email is not always literal. It can be a stand-in for a “simple” task that is required for many jobs and everyday situations. However, the same applies across situations. You shouldn’t judge people on their intellect, productivity, or their ability to perform paid labor. That is always ableist.

If your actual real problem with generative AI is that people are unable to perform certain tasks? Ableism. But if your problem is something else? Talk about it

I present my joke take on Adrian's first impression on Grace.

So some fanartist drew a “sexy” (read: booby) version of a (cartoon) character who is traditionally very non-sexualised. Fans of the character got mad about it because it’s kind of groundbreaking how that character is written and portrayed and this art totally ignores the entire point of the character. They demanded the art be deleted. In response to that other people said, well what the fanartist did may be distateful but they have every right to draw what they’re into. The two sides fight for days and each starts a harassment campaign and even report their “opponents’” accounts.

So far so typical. But things eventually come to a head and they decide that this will be settled by votes - not through a poll. Through donations to a children’s education charity via each side’s portal. Whoever can get the highest amount of donation wins.

the first picture shows a tweet:

"Don't police comedy" Well. I'm not going to arrest anyone. I'm not even trying to cancel anyone in the 2010s sense of having them lose their job. My goal for comedians who make regressive jokes is for them to change their minds. And for everyone to understand why jokes matter.

the second picture shows a quote retweet. twitter user ChoppedBeef says:

"All I want is for everyone to agree with me"

to which Benny Feldman's response is:

I would like everyone to be not racist instead of racist, yes

If you say shit that's mean or racist or transphobic, some people will not like you! Some people may, in fact call you an asshole.

Freedom of speech is not freedom from social and economic consequences! Somebody calling you a dick and refusing to give you money is not the same as throwing you in a gulag.