Banning AI Art

Thank you! I stopped using for a while because of the AI flood, now I can resume uploading again!

I know I'm late and too small But look at Wallhere and Smutty Not banning AI """Art""" leads to your site being completely overrun with the slop and even open to CSAM in the case of Smutty. You know how "That which allows porn will become entirely pornographic"? Well it literally goes the same for AI so unless you want facsimiles of xeroxes, ban AI. Wallpaper sites are always in a battle between coomers and normal SFW wallpapers. We don't need a third faction to tear the site apart.

JakeAddams said:

I know I'm late and too small But look at Wallhere and Smutty Not banning AI """Art""" leads to your site being completely overrun with the slop and even open to CSAM in the case of Smutty. You know how "That which allows porn will become entirely pornographic"? Well it literally goes the same for AI so unless you want facsimiles of xeroxes, ban AI. Wallpaper sites are always in a battle between coomers and normal SFW wallpapers. We don't need a third faction to tear the site apart.

That's what content filters are for. Nobody is fighting a purity war here, you can simply change the maturity filter to suit your needs.

WillyLongRooster33 said:

Thank you for sharing these

I'm glad you liked it, I recommend saving them to your PC for archiving purposes.

Thank you!

Thanks for this decision !

Thanks!!!

Thanks. That's the best decision.

PinecamppleX3 said:

OrionSDB said:

While I understand & respect your desire to preserve the spirit of the "old internet" & protect a community of human artists, I think banning AI art outright is a short-sighted move that may ultimately limit the richness of creative expression rather than protect it.

First, AI art is not inherently antithetical to human creativity, it is a tool, much like Photoshop, digital brushes or 3D modeling software once were. Behind every AI generated image is a human making choices: about prompts, composition, curation, iteration & intent. To suggest otherwise is to deny the existence of hybrid creativity, which is where the future of art undeniably lies. You say you want to fight "enshittification," but censoring innovation because it challenges a traditional workflow could just as easily be seen as another form of cultural regression.

Second, banning AI art sends an exclusionary message to a growing wave of digital creatives who are embracing new tools not to replace artistry, but to amplify it. Some of these people are artists who can no longer hold a stylus due to disability. Some are storytellers using visual tools to explore new worlds. Others are experimenting in ways traditional tools simply don't allow. You’re shutting the door on them without distinguishing between spam & sincere expression.

Finally, there’s a practical danger in drawing a hard line here: the definition of “AI art” is already murky. Should it include pieces where AI was used in composition but finished by hand? Or where an AI helped conceptualize a sketch later turned into a painting? The line is blurrier than your policy admits, & enforcement risks being both inconsistent & unjust.

Rather than banning a medium, why not foster curation & transparency? Let users tag, filter, and follow what they want. Build tools to spotlight human created content without erasing everything else. Respect your users by giving them choice, don’t make that choice for them.

In the name of preserving the “old internet,” we should be cautious not to revive its worst tendencies: fear of change, knee-jerk gatekeeping, & elitism masquerading as authenticity.

You don't need to like AI art... but banning it altogether risks alienating people who are using it ethically, creatively & with heart.

Literally nobody cares about the middle school rant you just went on about how sad you are about this development. Go back to diddling yourself to the women you make up on ChatGPT.

Added 2 minutes after

Lexobaal said:

iSuzume said:

Why intentionally cripple your site's popularity? Are we fighting windmills? AI is not going anywhere, and it's getting better every month, and I have no idea how you will know if it's AI-made or not. Who decides that?

I have seen so, so much bad art, screenshots of movies, and games. But are they okay because it's human slop? Why should they stay and AI go? Is it about ethics? People copy each other left and right, but nobody cares. A toggle was good enough, but clearly, people can't even tag properly. Create a system where people could vote for AI art to stay or be removed, so the best could stay.

And why look at the teeth of a free horse? Ads are never the problem; the problem is how site owners never know where to put them. Instead of one picture, there could be an ad. You don't need to go crazy with it, but additional money could be good for the site? No? I'm not an engineer regarding this.

you´re 100% right. But the owner choose to run with his head through the wall instead of creating a solution for everyone on this platform. YES AI is most of the times terrible. Its only sad that this decision was made from a personal grudge against AI.

You're a moron who posts AI generated women and thinks he "makes art". You're the actual lowest example of your species.

What a well reasoned critique that doesn't make you look like a child throwing a tantrum over AI

OMFG Thank you!!!!! I will report every A.I. work I see! A.I. can stick to math/science, leave it out of art! I honestly feel sorry for the people that are actually upset about this. A.I. has no place in art!

Art - the conscious use of skill and creative imagination especially in the production of aesthetic objects.

Plenty of screenshots being posted, and other 'art' - no way is all this anime stuff being created by artists Low-effort pointless crap At least some AI art looks decent

Bless

I often use AI-assisted tools to help me upscale old wallpapers that aren't good enough for modern screens. Is this allowed still?

I fully support this, tired of seeing ai generated images flooding wallpapers websites. And for people defending ai in art: no, there is no high quality "ai art", only high quality art theft.

AksumkA said:

Direct links and collections will still work until at least a week or so later. After that, all AI content will be removed.

Are they still getting removed, or do users need to manually flag them?

WillyLongRooster33 said:

PinecamppleX3 said:

OrionSDB said:

While I understand & respect your desire to preserve the spirit of the "old internet" & protect a community of human artists, I think banning AI art outright is a short-sighted move that may ultimately limit the richness of creative expression rather than protect it.

First, AI art is not inherently antithetical to human creativity, it is a tool, much like Photoshop, digital brushes or 3D modeling software once were. Behind every AI generated image is a human making choices: about prompts, composition, curation, iteration & intent. To suggest otherwise is to deny the existence of hybrid creativity, which is where the future of art undeniably lies. You say you want to fight "enshittification," but censoring innovation because it challenges a traditional workflow could just as easily be seen as another form of cultural regression.

Second, banning AI art sends an exclusionary message to a growing wave of digital creatives who are embracing new tools not to replace artistry, but to amplify it. Some of these people are artists who can no longer hold a stylus due to disability. Some are storytellers using visual tools to explore new worlds. Others are experimenting in ways traditional tools simply don't allow. You’re shutting the door on them without distinguishing between spam & sincere expression.

Finally, there’s a practical danger in drawing a hard line here: the definition of “AI art” is already murky. Should it include pieces where AI was used in composition but finished by hand? Or where an AI helped conceptualize a sketch later turned into a painting? The line is blurrier than your policy admits, & enforcement risks being both inconsistent & unjust.

Rather than banning a medium, why not foster curation & transparency? Let users tag, filter, and follow what they want. Build tools to spotlight human created content without erasing everything else. Respect your users by giving them choice, don’t make that choice for them.

In the name of preserving the “old internet,” we should be cautious not to revive its worst tendencies: fear of change, knee-jerk gatekeeping, & elitism masquerading as authenticity.

You don't need to like AI art... but banning it altogether risks alienating people who are using it ethically, creatively & with heart.

Literally nobody cares about the middle school rant you just went on about how sad you are about this development. Go back to diddling yourself to the women you make up on ChatGPT.

Added 2 minutes after

Lexobaal said:

iSuzume said:

Why intentionally cripple your site's popularity? Are we fighting windmills? AI is not going anywhere, and it's getting better every month, and I have no idea how you will know if it's AI-made or not. Who decides that?

I have seen so, so much bad art, screenshots of movies, and games. But are they okay because it's human slop? Why should they stay and AI go? Is it about ethics? People copy each other left and right, but nobody cares. A toggle was good enough, but clearly, people can't even tag properly. Create a system where people could vote for AI art to stay or be removed, so the best could stay.

And why look at the teeth of a free horse? Ads are never the problem; the problem is how site owners never know where to put them. Instead of one picture, there could be an ad. You don't need to go crazy with it, but additional money could be good for the site? No? I'm not an engineer regarding this.

you´re 100% right. But the owner choose to run with his head through the wall instead of creating a solution for everyone on this platform. YES AI is most of the times terrible. Its only sad that this decision was made from a personal grudge against AI.

You're a moron who posts AI generated women and thinks he "makes art". You're the actual lowest example of your species.

What a well reasoned critique that doesn't make you look like a child throwing a tantrum over AI

"..a child throwing a tantrum over AI"

The projection is generational. Cope and seethe.

AksumkA said:

After that, all AI content will be removed.

I'm still waiting for all AI content to be removed?

Alx said:

AksumkA said:

After that, all AI content will be removed.

I'm still waiting for all AI content to be removed?

All of the previous AI content will remain, but any new content uploaded to Wallhaven will be removed immediately.

Thank you!!

khyden said:

Alx said:

AksumkA said:

After that, all AI content will be removed. I'm still waiting for all AI content to be removed? All of the previous AI content will remain, but any new content uploaded to Wallhaven will be removed immediately.

But why? Just remove all the slop?

Alx said:

khyden said:

Alx said:

AksumkA said:

After that, all AI content will be removed. I'm still waiting for all AI content to be removed? All of the previous AI content will remain, but any new content uploaded to Wallhaven will be removed immediately.

But why? Just remove all the slop?

It's the same thing I said before. Since it would be extremely difficult for developers to remove all AI slop content, they chose to leave it in place and implement a new rule or ban to stop any new AI content from appearing on Wallhaven.

Also, It is an easy method. Ignore it and move on if you hate AI slop so much.

Most of my fav wallpapers this year has been AI and the creativity to make prompts work take a lots of effort. People call it theft but is anyone really getting paid here for their AI art? Aren't we all here for the sake of art and have a good time? Its not piracy...its just a point of reference since nobody is going to mark AI Art as legitimately valid to gain recognition. Are you afraid of AI replacing human artists? Something has to be shitty in the first place to be en-shittified.

The reason I care to comment here is this website is extremely well-made and outright banning new kind of art is something that I haven't been able to accept even though I browse this website almost thrice a week or more. Its getting kinda boring now.

Instead you could ban a user for not tagging AI art as AI. How long do we have to wait until the owner of this website change their mind on this subject which I think they wont. If this website stands for purity in art then that begs another question...Is digital art really that pure? What would the purists say.

Chad move 👏🏻

Makes no sense TBH.

Most of the "Wallpapers" shared here are shared without the consent of the Artist (Graphic designers, Photographers, Digital Painters, etc.).

Then why conscience does not allow for sharing AI stuff? It is made by using Human Artists art without their consent too. Just like this website.

I can understand if it was early days stuff that was terrible but now the Results are almost similar to what human artists create (obviously most of the art style is stolen from them).

Just my two cents.

sabir17 said:

Makes no sense TBH.

Most of the "Wallpapers" shared here are shared without the consent of the Artist (Graphic designers, Photographers, Digital Painters, etc.).

Then why conscience does not allow for sharing AI stuff? It is made by using Human Artists art without their consent too. Just like this website.

I can understand if it was early days stuff that was terrible but now the Results are almost similar to what human artists create (obviously most of the art style is stolen from them).

Just my two cents.

A lot of the stuff on here is just screenshots from games/films, or even just a black background with some text - how is that even considered art?

Banning AI was a stupid idea.