I keep seeing the same kind of post lately.

Someone warns people about using AI.

“If you use ChatGPT for writing, it’s going to blow up in your face.”
“You’ll sound like everyone else.”
“People will judge you.”
"The entitlement is ridiculous. Like, it only took me 20 years to hit this level as a writer. 😮‍💨"

That last line was all I needed to see.

Whenever someone pulls the “my level” card, I immediately begin asking questions. And, doing research.

What level are we talking about?

So I clicked through to see their profile. 20 years of experience as a writer. A personal brand that matches their social presence (abrasive, in your face).

Then I saw it.

Selling a $7 course.

Here’s the thought that landed with me and just and wouldn’t leave.

"Nobody has 20 years to wait to sell a $7 course."

If the level she is defending is this then a motivated beginner using AI can reach it in a weekend. Pick a topic you understand, organize it clearly, package it decently, and sell it for seven bucks. With AI or without, it doesn't matter.

And if it’s seven dollars, it raises another quiet question. Why isn’t it free?

What actually bothers me isn’t the pricing or even the quality. It's the way someone weaponizes authority and aims it directly at people who are already unsure of themselves.

That's because there’s a lazy assumption baked into a lot of these warnings. That anyone using ChatGPT is passive. That they type a sentence, accept whatever comes out, and move on. No editing. No taste. No judgment. No thinking.

That shouldn't be the default assumption when someone uses technology.

Good writing with AI doesn’t come from clever prompts. It comes from context. From knowing what matters. From organizing ideas before they ever touch a model. From feeding it real material. From referencing style intentionally. From editing afterwards.

In other words, the same things good writers have always done. And certainly something a 20+ year veteran ought to know.

Photographers hated Instagram when filters showed up. It “cheapened” photography. It made things too easy. It blurred the line between trained and untrained.

Fast forward, and real professionals started going to Instagram. The ones with taste adapted. The ones without kept complaining and ultimately, fell off.

What actually irritates me, though, is when fear turns into bullying.

I watched another thread where someone was being actively discouraged from making more AI artwork. Not critiqued. Threatened. Shamed. Told they were ruining art.

Since I began working with a true master, the way I look at people wielding their "artist" title has changed. Now, I judge by experience but also sales. Why? Anyone can make art, but not everyone can support themselves by being an artist. Reasonable people can disagree on whether commercial success is important in the definition of what an "artist" is, but thats my baseline. I set that line there because I don't believe AI impacts hobbyist artists in the same way as professional ones.

So I challenged the people in the thread. I said:

"There’s not one person in this comment thread, who is criticizing you that has done jack shit in their art career. Remember that when you read criticism here, it’s coming from completely un credentialed people."

Then a guy jumped in to establish dominance.

“I have a 30-year art career.”
“I’m credentialed.”
"All my art friends agree, Generative AI isn't real art."

So I looked him up too.

He was an established professional artist. Does work with Disney theme parks. Somehow was involved in restoring interest in Tiki art? Anyway, I will concede that he appears legit.

But here’s the thing that always gets skipped in these moments.

Being credentialed doesn’t give you permission to be an asshole.

And, despite his professional chops, they aren't so overwhelming as to entitle him to tell anyone else what to NOT do with their own art. If I won't accept it from Vince Gilligan, I won't accept it from him either.

You don’t win people to your side by accusing them, threatening them, or talking down to them. Especially when you’re speaking to people who are curious, tentative, and already worried they’re doing something wrong.

You need two things if you’re going to play the authority card.

Actual experience. And a baseline level of self-awareness and humanity (so weird to use this against the Anti-AI crowd but here we are).

Without both, all you’re really doing is gatekeeping.

That’s the tough pill to swallow in all of this. A lot of these anti-AI rants aren’t about craft or ethics. They’re about control. About defending a rickety old ladder that took decades to climb by insisting no one else is allowed to use the new kind.

Early adopters have always had to deal with this.

New tools arrive, but culture always lags behind. The people who adopt early get mocked, dismissed, or told they’re cheating. Then, quietly, the rest of the world catches up and pretends it was obvious all along.

What actually bothers me is seeing people try to stop others from trying.

If you’re confident in your work, you don’t need to scare people away from tools. If your voice is strong, you don’t need to threaten newcomers. If your level is real, it speaks for itself.

So when someone tells you you’ll “never get to their level,” do the simplest thing possible.

Look at what they’ve built.
Look at how they treat people.
Look at what they’re defending.

Then decide whether that’s a level you even want.