/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>everything that disagrees with what i like is bait
>a factual statement is bait now
>you're supposed to respect frauds who whore themselves out... because they have a bunch of minors and bots following them

>>7085018
>I am calling moral to the table because there are only two reasons to ban loli: laws and morals.
>or offended
Or simply because of public image of the company/site because most people aren't comfortable seeing child porn or gore or other extreme graphic imagery that could cause an involuntary mental or physical reaction, that would drive away customers and users, leaving the site to die.
Since you still won't accept that as it is factual but insist on the law&morals boogeyman you are building a strawman, Anon.
>Just put a filter
That is just an excuse for your argument because the point becomes;
>"lol just close your eyes"
Then you can very well apply that to everything and anything.

I could also say
>"lol private company they can do whatever they want. who cares about xyz? not my problem"

>i am someone
>you are someone
Extremely irrelevant.
It doesn't validate or invalidate arguments because someone is on a specific side or hold certain opinions and when you say that it truly boils down to
>"uhhhm we're the good guys and you're the bad guys so how can you be right? lol"
And i'm the one being disingenuous here. Holy shit.

>"NOOO WHY WON'T THE PRIVATE COMPANY WHO CARES ONLY ABOUT MONEY AND USER RETENTION NOT ALLOW SPECIFIC CONTENT THAT I LIKE?! FUCKING MORALITANS LAW ABIDERS"
Yeah, why doesn't the church allow me to go molest nuns or hang up nun porn in the vatican when i have a nun fetish? Fucking puritans

But riddle me this, nigger, if the market is almighty and "sex sells" therefore the market can do no wrong, why do you believe you are allowed to object to the market's demands? The market doesn't want loli porn, so why question it?

If loli made money and everyone was ok with it, you wouldn't see it banned and chased off the public eye.

Yeah, but it clearly is a conspiracy by crypto albino jews that most people don't want to see child porn because instincts are cringe. Fucking bigots.

>>6970867
Capeshit and school shooter simulators aren't really a good example of "art".
Capeslop has already a fanbase of manchildren and children eat this shit up anyway, so you have a huge consumer base ready to take it off your hands.
Call of Dooty games are just the Fifa of shooters and everyone is going to get the yearly installment because; it's new thing but with slightly different flavor.
And the product fatigue is slowly setting in the more lazy and greedy they get that they start cutting costs and corners.

Where do illustrations fall on? What's the point in churning them out mindlessly with image generation if the end result cannot even be considered your work anymore and pictures have no actual use besides being looked at?
Especially now that most "artists" are aware of this technology and when stealing works has already been a common practice since the commercialization of art?

As a art consumer, what is there to appreciate?
>"Oh but muh breddy picdur!! normies love preddy pic!!"
Wowing the mindless masses isn't a long term strategy, not as an artist nor as a business. Same as with the porn.
ESPECIALLY given that everyone will have AI image generation in the next couple years even on their shitty phones i,e, Gemini.
You're either grifting as long as the getting is good, or you're not very smart if you start using this technology to willingly replace your work because
>"it's a drag and you just need your brand so you can game the social media landscape"
If you're willing to throw away your own integrity, for faster and cheaper production, don't expect others to respect that or give you money, especially companies.

These threads are r*dditors trying to epic troll anyway, so why did i even bother posting? Because i am as a real nigger as it gets.
>>6971309
(you) are
very epic fellow 4channer
you had me seething almost
crying even
ur so witty