Im going to be the one guy that defends scratch on there recent update involving Ai, because someone has to. I do not fully agree with the new change, but I feel that its important for users to hear a reasonable counter point to their concerns regarding Ai.

AI only threatens people who are unable to make art better than it or who are unwilling to cooperate with it. Photographers have been using AI for decades, although the terminology has simply shifted from things like “content aware fill” and other technical jargon to “AI powered systems.” The same applies to video. AI video is really just a cheaper version of what already existed, which is computer generated graphics, and in many cases AI video is already worse in terms of quality. Disney and other companies have already sold their IP to AI companies, and chances are every major studio and production company will eventually do the same. Regardless, AI already scraped everyone’s artwork a long time ago, so there is no point in getting mad at Scratch. Google’s search bots crawled through every inch of the internet years ago to gather data to feed its systems. Since most major industries already incorporate and rely on AI, resisting the inevitable is futile.

People felt the same way about new technology when CGI appeared, when computers first became common, and even when calculators were introduced. The calculator caused a scare on the scale of ChatGPT because people thought no one would ever do math again. This was mostly before your time, but the idea is the same. AI is a tool, and the content it produces is only as valuable as the audience it gains. If no one engages with AI content, it has no value. If someone makes good AI content and people enjoy it, then that is simply how it goes.

Plus, the entire IP debate was lost a long time ago, especially on Scratch, which has never had copyright protection. This is why you can make content based on your favorite franchises without getting in trouble. Posting there means posting work that is effectively public domain, which means AI can be trained on it. Every company on earth essentially does this now, and it is written into the guidelines you agree to when you sign up.

The best thing artists can do is embrace AI as a tool rather than fear it as a replacement for creation. Artists who ignore it entirely are going to be overtaken by those who use AI with integrity, meaning as a tool rather than as the art itself. It is true that artists can choose where they post and can opt their work out of AI training, which is a good thing. It is also true that job displacement is a problem, but only in certain sectors. AI still needs humans to operate it, and many jobs still require human interaction because computers only exist in the digital world. People need to adapt.

A useful analogy comes from film. When digital cameras emerged, huge portions of the industry were wiped out. Entire sectors built around film stock and the technicians who handled it disappeared. Eventually the industry adapted. Jobs returned once people learned how to use the new digital formats, which were cheaper and could be operated by a single person. This should sound familiar, as this is how the ai operates now. In short, it is difficult, but people will adapt, and things will balance out because AI is only as valuable as people believe it is. The same thing happened in animation. Hand drawn animation largely disappeared once CGI arrived, yet parts of it survived. The same pattern will occur with AI. No one is going to prevent or take away your ability to make art in your own way.

And I know some of you think that ai will only make current times worse, but historically speaking, our times are no more chaotic than the 90s, 80s, 70s, 60s, or any other era of modern history. If anything, we are the most advanced and comfortable generation of humans to ever live, with more privilege than any prince in the 15th century. Concerns are valid, but society tends to balance itself out. What is useless fades, and what is useful thrives.

And to be fair, AI is a fine thing. It is useful, and it will give indie creators tools to compete with multi billion dollar industries so that artists without money can finally get recognition. AI art is not going to force anyone to stop creating human art, just as it will not stop me. I prefer a world where both AI and human work coexist. And I know many people say that the process is what makes something art, but when it comes to process, I do not believe art is defined by the method but by the intent and the final result. Otherwise, are photographers less artistic than painters? Are architects less artistic than musicians? Are designers less artistic than illustrators? Are digital filmmakers less artistic than those who use film stock? And can any art truly compete with the natural designs found in nature? The point i'm making is this: There are infinite processes and tools used to create art. Using AI in conjunction with human art is simply another one.

Of course, people who rely solely on AI because they lack other skills will not be creating meaningful art. However, people who know what they are doing and who use hybrid workflows will still create art, only in new ways that have not been done before. The assumption that everyone will lose jobs in the art world seems to be based on the idea that AI is a better artist than you, the reader. However, you will thrive regardless of AI if your art is good and provides intrinsic value to others, because the audience determines the success of art. Make art that people appreciate, and you will do fine, just like every successful artist that came before you.

Finally, it is not healthy to say you do not want to change with an evolving society, because I know some of you just want ai tech to just stop so no one has to adapt. But, the world has changed more in the past hundred years than humanity changed in the previous hundred thousand. Change is expected and necessary, and those who refuse to adapt will be left behind. It sounds harsh, but it is simply the reality of our rapidly evolving world.

In conclusion, learn to abstain from the ai, or learn to collaborate with it. Dont use the ai to replace your own vision. And dont dogmatically resist it. Realize its pros and cons and make an appropriate response based on that. I hope what I wrote will be illuminating for some of you. I dont intend to change your minds about ai, i'm only here to provide another perspective on this subject.

There's going to be a bunch of interesting replies in this topic

mingo-gag wrote:

There's going to be a bunch of interesting replies in this topic

Oh I know there will be. I'm ok with it. People are allowed to have their own opinions on the matter. Im 50/50 on the whole ai thing, so I hope to have some lively debate about it ha!

mingo-gag wrote:

There's going to be a bunch of interesting replies in this topic

Oh also your response makes alot more sense anyways, scratch only wants to use ai to help train assistants for coding, not using it to help create video or image models, which is much better anyways.

No suggestions?

kip22s wrote:

No suggestions?

Suggestions for what? I mean sure, everyone can choose to stop supporting scratch, you have the right to do that, but I do not think its a very productive thing to do.

Furrhead-Productions wrote:

kip22s wrote:

No suggestions?

Suggestions for what? I mean sure, everyone can choose to stop supporting scratch, you have the right to do that, but I do not think its a very productive thing to do.

This is the suggestion forum. And no one said that in the first place.

kip22s wrote:

Furrhead-Productions wrote:

kip22s wrote:

No suggestions?

Suggestions for what? I mean sure, everyone can choose to stop supporting scratch, you have the right to do that, but I do not think its a very productive thing to do.

This is the suggestion forum. And no one said that in the first place.

Ah lol. Well, I did not know where else to put this topic. Suggestions felt the most appropriate.

The OP wrote:

The calculator caused a scare on the scale of ChatGPT because people thought no one would ever do math again.

Yeah, but forgetting math is one thing; but a machine that has been proven to cause negative effects on the enviornment and the brain is another thing.

Your arguments mostly stem from “if people thought X would replace Y, then AI replacing X/Y is fine!”
I remember hearing once that for say, photography and art, photography can exist on its own, without canvases with paint. What i'm saying is that if the camera was invented before regular art, then people would've said “Art will replace Photography!!1!”

However, AI has to be trained on other art. If the concept of art doesn't exist, then the AI has nothing to train on, and it can't do anything. This is what people mean by “AI has no soul/can't learn”: If you only give an AI vector clip art; it won't know how to generate a photo.

Link to why CLA is bad.
And that old man argument is weak.

kip22s wrote:

Link to why CLA is bad.

Lol, scratch globalist AI conspiracy theory was not on my bingo card for 2026, but here we are.

People are mostly annoyed when AI is used as the final result. If you're not artistic, then you could trace an AI image! (not sure how ethical that would be, but that's not important for this argument)

AI is great* as part of the process! I agree with you on that now.

The OP wrote:

Regardless, AI already scraped everyone’s artwork a long time ago, so there is no point in getting mad at Scratch.

“a long time ago” but what if you only started posting your art a short time ago, before everyone scraped everything? I'm not sure if companies are still scraping things; but I can reasonably assure you that your project's code, images, and sounds have not beed scraped.

AI video is really just a cheaper version of what already existed

Nuh-uh-uh! AI-generated video is NOT CGI (if you're being pedantic, then yes, but let me explain)! AI video also relies on training with pre-existing videos (like in my previous post), but CGI does NOT require huge servers running AI models that require scraping YouTube (yes cgi could use ai in some parts; but not generative AI)

d016 wrote:

The OP wrote:

The calculator caused a scare on the scale of ChatGPT because people thought no one would ever do math again.

Yeah, but forgetting math is one thing; but a machine that has been proven to cause negative effects on the enviornment and the brain is another thing.

Your arguments mostly stem from “if people thought X would replace Y, then AI replacing X/Y is fine!”
I remember hearing once that for say, photography and art, photography can exist on its own, without canvases with paint. What i'm saying is that if the camera was invented before regular art, then people would've said “Art will replace Photography!!1!”

However, AI has to be trained on other art. If the concept of art doesn't exist, then the AI has nothing to train on, and it can't do anything. This is what people mean by “AI has no soul/can't learn”: If you only give an AI vector clip art; it won't know how to generate a photo.

True, but its a little bit of a slippery slope to critique the ai for harming the environment. You know the internet wastes water right? You know the databases scratch runs on wastes water right? You are aware that basically all things that run on databases, so all of the internet, runs of off databases that use huge loads of water and electricity, right? To critique ai would be to critique the entirety of all modern digital systems and servers. Not to mention, the production of corn in just the USA wastes 20 trillion gallons of water a year, compared to the measely projected water waste of ai which is 260 billion gallons. Source for that is here: https://green.org/2025/01/09/ai-water-and-electricity-usage-truths-and-myths/

Furrhead-Productions wrote:

kip22s wrote:

Link to why CLA is bad.

Lol, scratch globalist AI conspiracy theory was not on my bingo card for 2026, but here we are.

It is true that some Chat-bot models can be used for propaganda/corporate reasons (as shown in kip's link)

You can't really do this with image/sound-models (unless it just refuses to render certain stuff)

Honestly it's probably not going to be an issue with the CLA for what it is (unless it tells you that scratch has had no controversies whatsoever, but that's unlikley )

d016 wrote:

People are mostly annoyed when AI is used as the final result. If you're not artistic, then you could trace an AI image! (not sure how ethical that would be, but that's not important for this argument)

AI is great* as part of the process! I agree with you on that now.

The OP wrote:

Regardless, AI already scraped everyone’s artwork a long time ago, so there is no point in getting mad at Scratch.

“a long time ago” but what if you only started posting your art a short time ago, before everyone scraped everything? I'm not sure if companies are still scraping things; but I can reasonably assure you that your project's code, images, and sounds have not beed scraped.

AI video is really just a cheaper version of what already existed

Nuh-uh-uh! AI-generated video is NOT CGI (if you're being pedantic, then yes, but let me explain)! AI video also relies on training with pre-existing videos (like in my previous post), but CGI does NOT require huge servers running AI models that require scraping YouTube (yes cgi could use ai in some parts; but not generative AI)

Im being pedantic, im aware its not literal CGI…. however CGI does mean computer generated graphics, and AI is just a computer, generating graphics, so theres that lol. Also, you may not be aware but CGI requires vast amounts of water usage. The computers, databases, servers to offload rendering time, tools, and manpower to create marvel level CGI is quite large. They are using advanced computer systems GPUS and electricity to create those graphics. They are not just using there laptop to make that stuff, plus dont get me started on the immense cost of resources it takes to create the studio spaces and green background for filming CGI environments.

Furrhead-Productions wrote:

True, but its a little bit of a slippery slope to critique the ai for harming the environment. You know the internet wastes water right? You know the databases scratch runs on wastes water right? You are aware that basically all things that run on databases, so all of the internet, runs of off databases that use huge loads of water and electricity, right? To critique ai would be to critique the entirety of all modern digital systems and servers. Not to mention, the production of corn in just the USA wastes 20 trillion gallons of water a year, compared to the measely projected water waste of ai which is 260 billion gallons. Source for that is here: https://green.org/2025/01/09/ai-water-and-electricity-usage-truths-and-myths/

I KNOW I KNOW I KNOW!!!!!!!!! (well, sort of: thank you for telling me that corn is more wasteful!)
When I mention about the enviornment, it's never the first reason as to cancel generative AI. I just mention it as a very minor thing that doesn't really affect things too much. What about my “negative effects on … the brain” part? You didn't even say anything about that!

d016 wrote:

Furrhead-Productions wrote:

kip22s wrote:

Link to why CLA is bad.

Lol, scratch globalist AI conspiracy theory was not on my bingo card for 2026, but here we are.

It is true that some Chat-bot models can be used for propaganda/corporate reasons (as shown in kip's link)

You can't really do this with image/sound-models (unless it just refuses to render certain stuff)

Honestly it's probably not going to be an issue with the CLA for what it is (unless it tells you that scratch has had no controversies whatsoever, but that's unlikley )

Oh for sure, parts of it are true. I just find it a bit funny that scratch has become apart of that whole world

Furrhead-Productions wrote:

Im being pedantic, im aware its not literal CGI….

Oh, thank you. I actually didn't know about CGI's huge power consumption until you mentioned it now.

I still agree with my point that CGI does not rely on grabbing pre-existing videos.

Thanks, though;
- d016

Furrhead-Productions wrote:

kip22s wrote:

Link to why CLA is bad.

Lol, scratch globalist AI conspiracy theory was not on my bingo card for 2026, but here we are.

You're literally what I'm talking about. Ignorance.

Furrhead-Productions wrote:

d016 wrote:

Furrhead-Productions wrote:

kip22s wrote:

Link to why CLA is bad.

Lol, scratch globalist AI conspiracy theory was not on my bingo card for 2026, but here we are.

It is true that some Chat-bot models can be used for propaganda/corporate reasons (as shown in kip's link)

You can't really do this with image/sound-models (unless it just refuses to render certain stuff)

Honestly it's probably not going to be an issue with the CLA for what it is (unless it tells you that scratch has had no controversies whatsoever, but that's unlikley )

Oh for sure, parts of it are true. I just find it a bit funny that scratch has become apart of that whole world

Read. CLA is no different. Keep laughing it off, and be ignorant and uneducated, your choice.