Morbid Writer

Author & world-builder. Writer of strange worlds. Essayist dissecting reality, questioning assumptions, chasing ideas. In Scriptis Veritas.

[Morbid Writer @MorbidWriter26]

Hi. I figure it’s probably time I properly introduced myself and explained what I’m actually trying to do here.

Most days, I’m a pretty ordinary guy.

I work at a convenience store. I stand behind a counter, help customers, stock things, clean things, deal with the occasional weirdness that comes with working nights, and eventually go home.

Nothing particularly glamorous about it. Then I get home, get online, and I become Morbid Writer.

That sounds much more dramatic than it actually is.

I’m a writer. I love books. I love stories. I love history, science, philosophy, religion, culture, technology, and all those wonderfully strange subjects that can send you down a research rabbit hole at three in the morning because somebody said something that made you go “Wait. Is that actually true?”

That question is basically where this whole thing starts.

Because the more I read, write, argue, research, and talk to people, the more convinced I’ve become that one of the biggest problems we face is not simply disagreement.

It’s ignorance. And I don’t mean that as an insult.

There’s nothing shameful about not knowing something. Every single one of us is ignorant about vastly more things than we understand. Sometimes nobody ever taught us.

Sometimes the information is difficult to find.

Sometimes it is buried underneath jargon, misinformation, propaganda, tribalism, or ten people yelling contradictory claims at each other.

That kind of ignorance can be fixed. You learn, ask questions, read, and listen.

You change your mind when the evidence demands it.

The kind of ignorance I have a problem with is the kind we choose to protect. Refusing to investigate something because we already like our answer.

Dismissing evidence because it came from the “wrong” person. Repeating something because everyone around us repeats it.

Deciding that changing our mind is somehow weakness rather than evidence that we learned something.

That is what Morbid Writer is meant to fight.

Not people. Ignorance.

And the weapons I want to use against it are pretty simple.

Integritas. Veritas. Constantia.

Integrity. Truth. Resolve.

Integrity in how I research, write, and represent people whose views may be different from mine.

Truth over whatever answer happens to be most convenient for me.

And resolve to keep asking questions even when the answers are uncomfortable.

That also explains why I write essays. I’m not interested in building a platform where I simply tell people what they are supposed to think.

I would much rather say “Here’s the question. Here’s what I found. Here are the sources. Here’s the context. Now let’s actually think about it.”

If you finish one of my essays agreeing with me, cool. If you disagree with me, also cool.

If you check my sources, find something I missed, and show me that I’m wrong, then we both learned something.

I don’t want followers who simply repeat my opinions.

I want readers who are curious enough to form their own.

And I want this place to eventually become something bigger than me talking at people from behind a screen.

I want conversation, questions, disagreement, and learning.

The kind of environment where somebody can pull up a chair, open a book, put an idea on the table and say “Okay. Let’s examine this.”

Because ultimately, I don't want to build an echo chamber. I want to build a study.

That’s Morbid Writer.

An ordinary guy with an unreasonable number of books, too many questions, and the stubborn belief that the world gets a little better when people are willing to learn from one another.

Stories. Ideas. Discussion. A more curious world.

In Scriptis Veritas.

[Morbid Writer @MorbidWriter26]

That’s a categorically incorect. AI absolutely can be a tool. "Tool" describes how something is used, not how sophisticated it is.

A chatbot is one kind of AI system, but so are image models, speech models, recommendation systems, computer-vision systems, scientific models, autonomous agents, and plenty of systems that never “chat” at all.

Saying “if it can’t chat, how is it AI?” confuses one interface with the entire field. A calculator doesn’t stop being a tool because it can’t hold a conversation, and an AI system doesn’t stop being AI because conversation isn’t its job.

[Morbid Writer @MorbidWriter26]

“AI is theft” repeated ten times doesn't make it a fact.

Some AI training practices raise legitimate copyright questions, and some may cross the line depending on how works were obtained and used but even the U.S. Copyright Office treats that as a fact-specific fair-use and licensing question, not “all generative AI = theft.”

And models like Adobe Firefly are trained on licensed Adobe Stock and public-domain material, with contributors compensated, so the absolute claim fails immediately.

[Morbid Writer @MorbidWriter26]

By “universal standard for creativity or intelligence,” I mean your personal method is not the only valid benchmark for whether someone is thinking creatively or using their brain well.

I’m not saying people are stupid by default. I’m saying you can’t infer that someone is becoming stupid, lazy, or intellectually dependent merely because AI is part of their workflow.

The relevant question is how they use it as a substitute for thought, or as a tool within thought. Those are not the same thing.

[Morbid Writer @MorbidWriter26]

That’s fine for you. But your personal workflow is not a universal standard for creativity or intelligence. Using AI does not automatically mean someone stopped thinking, researching, or learning.

It can be used to brainstorm, organize, critique, iterate, or accelerate work the user is still actively directing. “I learned to work without this tool” does not logically become “therefore anyone who uses it isn’t using their brain.”

That’s not an argument against AI. It’s just turning your preferred method into a moral hierarchy.

[Morbid Writer @MorbidWriter26]

That’s still a caricature of how the technology works.
Generative models do not ordinarily store artists’ work and “mash it together” like a collage, nor do language models write books by grabbing sentences from existing novels and swapping a few words.

They learn statistical patterns from training data and generate new outputs from those learned relationships, though memorization and regurgitation can sometimes occur and absolutely deserve scrutiny.

And yes, someone can use AI lazily and outsource an entire project but that proves misuse is possible, not that every use is fraudulent.

A calculator can do the arithmetic for you that doesn’t mean every mathematician using one has abandoned mathematics.

If your criticism is about training consent, licensing, or specific copied outputs, make that case.

But “AI = remix machine = no effort = theft” is technically wrong, crude, and intellectually dishonest.

[Morbid Writer @MorbidWriter26]

@Nightwolf5656 very nice. 👍

[Morbid Writer @MorbidWriter26]

@NachisuMikuX 💯🫡

[Morbid Writer @MorbidWriter26]

I’m sorry you were pushed away from your passions, but that still doesn’t make hardship a prerequisite for legitimacy.

Respecting artists does not mean preserving every barrier they had to overcome. I’m a writer; I use AI to help organize, refine, and develop ideas, but the stories, judgments, revisions, and final decisions are still mine.

Technology reducing friction does not erase effort or authorship. Your struggle deserves empathy, not replication. The next person should not have to suffer the same limitations just to prove they “respect” the craft.

[Morbid Writer @MorbidWriter26]

“JPEGs don’t need consent” is technically cute and socially braindead. The file isn’t the issue; you are deliberately targeting the person behind it after they asked you not to. Criticize their position. Disagree with their boundaries. Use AI proudly. But intentionally doing something to piss them off and then calling them a bitch is not principled resistance. It’s harassment.

[Morbid Writer @MorbidWriter26]

@nectareenart then keep eating pussy instead of talking out your ass coward.

[Morbid Writer @MorbidWriter26]

@takarithmeticVT Say it loud say it proud. Love your art btw.

[Morbid Writer @MorbidWriter26]

@kuromiyalucien Sushi

[Morbid Writer @MorbidWriter26]

@nekaishi The man supports terrorist. That wasn't enough of a clue?

[Morbid Writer @MorbidWriter26]

@nerinahazuki All the time. I don't post to be liked but to enlighten.

[Morbid Writer @MorbidWriter26]

Your first sentence defeats itself: if “literally anyone can do it themselves,” then why do people hire programmers, illustrators, translators, editors, animators, and designers in the first place?

Tools exist because people have different skills, time, and access. And your “name one” challenge is easy Adobe Firefly.

Adobe says its models are trained on licensed Adobe Stock content and public-domain material, not scraped customer content or indiscriminately mined web art, and contributors are compensated for training use.

As for “AI kills critical thinking,” actual research is more nuanced: overreliance can reduce cognitive effort, but GenAI also shifts thinking toward verification, integration, and oversight.

So no, repeating “lazy, stupid, thief” louder doesn’t make it true. You asked for one counterexample and disproved your own absolute claim.

[Morbid Writer @MorbidWriter26]

@MuseMallow I genuinely appreciate that. Have a blessed day.

[Morbid Writer @MorbidWriter26]

You’re still just repeating the accusation instead of proving it. "Slop machine,” “lazy,” and “talentless” are insults, not arguments, and “AI steals art” is not a settled factual description of how every model is trained or every output is produced.

Some training practices deserve criticism; that does not make every person using generative AI a plagiarist.

People use AI for ideation, iteration, editing, coding, design, accessibility, and production often alongside skills they already have.

If your case is strong, make it with evidence. If all you have is “you’re talentless because I hate your tool,” then you're just a prejudice bigot.

[Morbid Writer @MorbidWriter26]

This is exactly why blanket “AI user = lazy/thief/fraud” rhetoric is so intellectually bankrupt. You’re literally an AI engineer using the technology to automate tedious parts of work you already know how to do, while keeping the core human-written, respecting consent, and protecting people’s data.

AI is a tool. The ethics depend on how the person uses it, not on whether the tool exists in their workflow at all.

[Neko Unix 🐾💾🌐 【Bгﻪէ Pﻪ८ĸ】 @NekoUnix]

I am clarifying something. For my friends, and for myself. I work with AI daily by trade to feed my family. I code and train models, and move data around as a data engineer. Mainly work in Databricks and Fabric.

Anything Gen AI I used, I had asked for permission to put in before running it through my own locally made AI. This AI is on my computer and never touches a datacenter.

The ARIA programs was built with AI help for boiler plate stuff. But the core components are all hand written. I am a dev, lets be honest we all hate writing documentation, and doing DevOps pipelines as they are brittle. I have been planning ARIA for months at this point, and working on prototypes in the background with friends. ARIA, has no AI in it, and never sends any data out unless you use the log button and send me the metadata yourself for corrections.

Being a VTuber and an AI engineer is tough. I am trying to make the decisions I think are best, but then get hate mobbed and accused from people who do not know what they are talking about, or already made up their minds and just want to attack someone.

I am going to continue to do both. I will always ask permission before I use someone's work for something, and I will always respect my friends wishes. But if me being an AI engineer first, and a Vtuber second bothers you? Please leave. As that is who I am, and that is not changing. I have a wife and daughter to feed.

And going forward if I find cool AI news, work, or anything I am going to share it. I believe the tech as a tool to help aide in production of human skills. Not replace it.

[Morbid Writer @MorbidWriter26]

@AriaALake @SylvyLastname Flinging insults doesn't make you right. It shows your ignorance.