Evidence first. Panic last.

Common AI complaints, checked against reality.

Not pro-AI propaganda. Not panic theater. Just short, sourced replies to recycled claims about art theft, energy use, jobs, hallucinations, privacy, and more.

Claim board

The usual complaints, shortened.

Each card is designed for quick scanning first, with deeper evidence and source notes one tap away.

These are the claims most likely to be repeated without numbers, definitions, or comparison baselines.

EnvironmentSourcedClaim misleading

Is AI bad for the environment?

Data center growth deserves real numbers, not planet-doom slogans.

ClaimEvidenceVerdict
EnvironmentSourcedClaim misleading

Does AI use too much water?

Water claims need location, cooling method, and data-center baselines.

ClaimEvidenceVerdict
ArtSourcedClaim unproven

Does AI steal art?

Training, copying, style imitation, copyright, and compensation are different claims.

ClaimEvidenceVerdict
CopyrightSourcedClaim rejected

Is AI just plagiarism?

Plagiarism, infringement, memorization, and style imitation are not the same thing.

ClaimEvidenceVerdict
EducationSourcedClaim misleading

Does AI make students stupid?

Tool misuse is real, but cheating and learning support are different claims.

ClaimEvidenceVerdict

Claim -> Evidence -> Verdict.

The format is intentionally simple because the repeated complaint usually is too.

Claim

"AI is destroying the planet."

Evidence

Compare actual baselines, tradeoffs, and source quality.

Verdict

Concern may be real. Viral framing is often lazy.