You must log in or register to comment.
That’s my issue with people saying stuff like “I can immediately tell when a picture is made with AI and I hate how they look”
Your assesment doesn’t take into account all the false negatives. You have no idea how many pictures have tricked you already. By definition, the picture is badly made if you can immediately tell it’s AI. That’s a bit like seeing the most flamboyantly gay person on the street and thinking all gays look like that and you can always spot them while the closeted friend you’re with flies perfectly under the radar.
It also doesn’t help that they are working to improve it all the time.
Many unedited or using old Ai images I can detect with one look. A few more I can find by looking for inconsistencies like hands or illogical items.
However I am sure there will be more AI generated images that may even be a little bit edited afterwards that I can’t detect.
You will need an ai to detect them. Since at least in images ai is detectable by the way they create the files.
In AI-generated sound you can see it in the waveform, it has less random noise altogether and it seems like a huge, well, wave. I wonder if sth similar is true for images.
As a visually impaired person on the internet. YES! welcome to our world!
You’re lucky enough to get an image description that helpfully describes the image.
That description rarely tells you if it’s AI generated, that’s if the description writer even knows themselves.
Everyone in the comments saying “look at the hands, that’s AI generated”, and I’m sitting here thinking, I just have to trust the discussion, because that image, just like every other image I’ve ever seen, is hard to fully decipher visually, let alone look for evidence of AI.
Is there no software that can just tell you if it’s AI generated or not?
Alt text: a beautiful girl on a dock at sunset with some fugly hands and broken ass fingees
Honestly, auto generating text descriptions for visually impaired people is probably one of the few potential good uses for LLM + CLIP. Being able to have a brief but accurate description without relying on some jackass to have written it is a bonefied good thing. It isn’t even eliminating anyone’s job since the jackass doesn’t always do it in the first place.
I’ve never seen a good answer to this in accessibility guides, would you mind making a recommendation? Is there any preferred alt text for something like:
- “clarification image with an arrow pointing at object”
- “Picture of a butt selfie, it’s completely black”
- “Picture of a table with nothing on it”
- “example of lens flare shown from camera”
- “N/A” dangerous
Sometimes an image is clearly only useful as a visual aid, I feel like “” (exluding it) makes people feel like they are missing the joke. But given it’s an accessibility tool; unneeded details may waste your time.
fewer*
I gotta fewer
and the only rescription is
more bowcell
You see less AI generated fewer.
You see less ai generated imagery
Unless they meant that individual images had less AI generation in them.
(I’m with you, words matter)
You notice AI generated images less
Ranier Wolfcastle in front of a brick wall saying “that’s the joke.”
“You suck McBain”
We got the timeline where spam is an existential threat in both directions…
I see you’re a fan of dystopian futures.
Thank you. I should have gotten that.
Plot twist: This image is AI generated.
Ofck
you replied to an AI generated comment
Wow, Bruce Springsteen looks a lot rougher than he did just a few days ago.
iFunny and mematic watermark? You’re bullshitting.
The Circle of Life
The only thing missing is a bad screenshot.
I’ve enworsened it for you!
*fewer
You said (almost) the same thing as the top comment, an hour earlier, too, yet you only have 3 updoots, while they have 60+. What gives? Is it because you’re from hexbear and most simply don’t see your comment?
Lemmy.World is the largest instance, and they preemptively defederated from hexbear.net a year ago, citing several examples of user comments that they wanted to protect their own userbase from.
Many other large instances have done similarly - another one is programming.dev (statement), although in their case if was merely to prevent one-sided conversations after hexbear.net defederated from them. The funny part of that story is how the admins took a vote, which indicated an unwillingness to defederate (27 to 19) but then did it anyway:-).
Anyway, many users of hexbear.net have made quite the reputation for themselves around the Fediverse, to the point where MANY instances felt the need to defederate from the entire instance (think: Truth Social but claiming to be leftist). And at this point, many users on it seem proud of that or at least consider it part of the cost of traversing the wider Fediverse using an account based on hexbear.net.
Yeah, I know they have been defederated to pieces, albeit not in as much detail as you provided, I was just trying to confirm that that was the reason, to better understand how federation works. Our instance has lately been blocking some of their communities, too.
I don’t quite understand the vote results, especially in conjunction with the post content, I don’t see any ties, but I was most surprised by the fact that they voted to defederate from blahaj.zone? Isn’t hexbear rabidly pro-inclusion, in particular regarding trans people?
I have decided that must be the case; it usually happens to me when I venture out of hexbear, haha.
