iiinova — where your digital self keeps evolving

Vee @jesuvee.bsky.social · 06/10/2026

the ad-hominem shit is incredibly rich coming from a reactionary tenderqueer btw. I appreciate that you at least acknowledge the institution of marriage instead of poly commune sovereignty or whatever though

010

Vee @jesuvee.bsky.social · 06/10/2026

my ethics are informed not by normative standards of being politically correct, but general economic knowledge, substantial philosophical backing, and virtue as well as utility, lol. You're truly a hypocrite if you believe that shitting on people enjoying Harry Potter makes you significantly moral

120

Vee @jesuvee.bsky.social · 06/10/2026

You fundamentally misunderstand utility in intelligently critical thought, falsely heralding this idea that "Your guy is bad so you can't read this thing even if it's good." which is harshly anti-intellectual, something Rowling loves btw For the record, I'm edgy, correct, AND happily married, lol

110

Vee @jesuvee.bsky.social · 05/10/2026

idk why you think condemning the author of something somehow mitigates all the value in their works

110

Vee @jesuvee.bsky.social · 05/10/2026

and Noam Chomsky was in a pedophile ring with Epstein, but Manufacturing Consent is still an intellectually valuable book?

210

Vee @jesuvee.bsky.social · 05/10/2026

that doesn't necessarily negate my point though. (X) percent of American/UK taxes go to awful shit alongside the structure siphoning value from groceries, private car maintenance, clothing, etc. I doubt you spend your money ethically in any meaningful way, so what's wrong with 4chan liking malfoid?

000

Vee @jesuvee.bsky.social · 05/10/2026

I'd elaborate more on this, but Bsky has a stupid typing count that I have to work around

000

Vee @jesuvee.bsky.social · 05/10/2026

I feel like this presumes that any purchases are moral ones tbh. Peter Singer has a famous essay on this actually, wherein under normative understandings of ethics, nobody's operations and consumption are moral, and are, in fact, specifically the opposite. Who cares if people make fanart for free?

330

Vee @jesuvee.bsky.social · 05/10/2026

I can't tell if this is engagement bait or not, but it seems insanely presumptive on so many levels. This is strangely generalizing, too, which seems ignorant for someone who seemingly wants to have a particularly articulate opinion on this art trend, lol. Ultimately, why is this a problem to you?

010

Vee @jesuvee.bsky.social · 05/10/2026

is it not normally okay to make Harry Potter fanart?

000

Vee @jesuvee.bsky.social · 05/10/2026

what's wrong with HP?

100

Vee @jesuvee.bsky.social · 02/10/2026

I guess I fundamentally don't understand the significance of the differentiation between AI art and something like those swinging leaking paint can abstract works if this exposes some strange transcendental truth about art that undermines tDotA. AI art is produced just as any other art or thing is?

000

Vee @jesuvee.bsky.social · 01/10/2026

How is it principally abhorrent though? I feel like as soon as you get into divulging what produces "artistic merit" or the means of justifying plagiarism as a viably applicable concept, you befall to this really shitty, ultimately ANTI-ART ideology founded upon some weird art conservatism

000

Vee @jesuvee.bsky.social · 01/10/2026

this is a surprisingly refreshing take to see explored in the discussions beneath this post and the one quoted. For all the artists decrying the fall of essentially superior human art to that of AI "slop", they often fail to recognize the means by which they mirror the slop production

000

Vee @jesuvee.bsky.social · 01/10/2026

how does it undo the concept of the death of the author?

100

Vee @jesuvee.bsky.social · 01/10/2026

I fail to understand the significance of "stolen" with this whole genre of AI argument. How does intellectual property account for a metaphysical interpretation of a visual image, and why does that matter? Functionally, this is no different than any productive artistic unit referencing something

000

Vee @jesuvee.bsky.social · 01/10/2026

isn't he making fun of their repressed desire as extensive of their self-referential shame about being homosexual? Reducing it to “Why do they always have to be perverts, like gays or pedophiles” is a brutal strawman and kinda just flaming for no reason

000

Vee @jesuvee.bsky.social · 30/09/2026

I've been seeing a lot of posts that more or less read, "I don't 'identify' as (x), I *AM* (x).", and I honestly find it a little silly? It seems almost counterintuitive for most of the people making this argument to appeal to the essential nature of these aspects of themselves, namely trans stuff

020

Vee @jesuvee.bsky.social · 30/09/2026

the legalities of rights are already pretty silly to me, but further complicating that by binding them to respective sexes is utterly braindead

001

Vee @jesuvee.bsky.social · 30/09/2026

this doesn't read as substantially bio-essentialist to me in any meaningful regard. Is he wrong to suggest that societal circuitry produces distinct experiences that differ between even smaller groups like cis-women/trans-women? The production of both of these expressions are significantly different

120