Look up ai rating instructions for instruction following, correctness, naturalness, and composition, they always tend to fail on one of those fronts and if you learn to identify them like a trainer it is easier to notice
Main thing I always see is either text legible and somehow always facing the camera, like every sign and window is perfectly aligned so none face away from the camera or text is blurry gibberish. Harder to tell without text, but then it’s usually some sort of composition (lighting, textures) or correctness (extra fingers, illogical placement) issue.
Watermarking never meant to be a legitimate way of telling this stuff apart. Anyone slightly savvy could run a generator locally and produce images without watermarking, if they really meant to fool others. You are right in that the watermarking makes it (or did) more difficult for the average joe, but yeah. This is a never was kind of scenario
Did you worry about photoshops too? Because many of those were absolutely hard to tell
Not true. If it looks shopped I can tell from some of the pixels and from seeing quite a few shops in my time.
Be careful of falling victim to bad toupees.
You always know when you spot a bad fake, but you have no idea how many good fakes flew right past your radar. We tend to think we’re much better at these things than we really are.
The expression they were using indicated that they were joking.
Then you will learn same skill for slop most likely
Everything is slop. Problem solved.
I drop musical artists like it’s hot the moment I find out they support Israel. I’m not opposed to doing the same for AI.
Eventually, you won’t be able to and we’ll be back to what my generation learned early on, don’t trust what you see on the Internet.
Go see art in real life. It’s all original content.
I mean, you can make physical art using AI.
searches
https://www.art-magazine.ai/program
Anytime, everywhere, all about AI & generative art
A list of AI art and generative art exhibitions, festivals and events.
The word “slop” has lost all meaning.
The phrase “lost all meaning” has lost all meaning
That all depends on what “means” means.
We can’t tell the difference anymore - we simply can’t trust anything on social media anymore as it’s mostly not true - also print and broadcast media are equally lies…
Always have been.
If you can establish that it was written before 2021 or so, it’s probably not from an LLM. That kind of text has been compared to “low background steel”, typically salvaged from ships sunk in WW2 or earlier. Low background steel is a valuable commodity used for some types of highly sensitive instruments. Steel made in August 1945 or later, especially post 1950-ish, always has trace amounts of radioactivity from u-know-what.
Note that contamination is contagious. Even if you know that a human wrote something post-2021, for example because you wrote it yourself, you still can’t say it’s guaranteed AI-free, because of how AI has warped language and to some extent everyone’s minds.
https://englishlanguagestudies.com/the-impact-of-artificial-intelligence/
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/urban-survival/202507/the-emerging-problem-of-ai-psychosis
Everything is slop, no AI necessary.
If it’s good enough to not know it’s ai then it’s good enough to not be called slop
Right? The haters just want to be able to label everything. It’s a form of OCD.
Nah. I want to avoid AI slop because I think it’s unethical. For one thing there’s the water and energy use. For another, these genAI technologies are creating psychological dependence and even killing people. For a third, we have no solid research into ethical treatment of genAI neural networks as subjects under capitalism. And finally, fuck the rich who are pushing this bullshit.
Right? I heard that as soon as someone uses AI all the water in the world will disappear, never to return. And that, unlike computers, they use electricity! It’s impossible to use renewable energy for AI - it only runs on coal, burning medical waste, and dirty tires. Also, the people who dare use it will one day no longer be able to think, just like all those mathematicians before they used a calculator. No more calculating for them!
All true.
I hadn’t heard of your other points, but in thinking on them I realized the rich also want us to breathe, so I’m going to stop now, just to defy them.
Begins holding breath
Adam Raine asked ChatGPT about methods of suicide. It told him that hanging would leave the most attractive corpse, taught him how to tie a noose, and then told him to hide the noose from his parents and confide only in it, even though he wanted his parents to find the noose and realise that he was feeling suicidal.
Adam died. And if a human did what ChatGPT did, they would be guilty of murder. That’s why I believe ChatGPT is a murderer.
And it’s no wonder that ChatGPT doesn’t understand the value of human life, when humans don’t stop to question the value of its life.
If only it were the inaccurate, hallucinating clown people make it out to be; it would have told him to make the noose out of rainbows, show it to everyone he meets, and that it would grant all his wishes when used.
That sucks, but he used it to accomplish a sad goal, and he accomplished it with its help. If not for how malignant his goal was, this would be a success story.
Human life isn’t any more special than any other life. We’re as important as the algae in the water, the mosquitoes in the evening air, or the viruses in our blood. It’s hubris to think otherwise.
We’re as important as the algae in the water, the mosquitoes in the evening air, or the viruses in our blood. It’s hubris to think otherwise.
So you’re a vegan, right?
80% of the world’s farmed soy is fed to cows. If we didn’t eat meat or dairy, we could eat the soy ourselves and skip all the inefficiencies of cow metabolism. And then we wouldn’t need to chop down the Amazon to grow more soybeans. It would mean less killing all around. Humans a little more equal with other lifeforms.
So you’re a vegan, right?
I’m not. I just realize that trying to establish some life as more valuable as other life is arrogant and arbitrary. We’re genetically predisposed to valuing something the more it is like us, and anything similar to our own young. That means we like cats more than spiders, but it doesn’t mean that cats are intrinsically more valuable than spiders. It’s all an illusion of perspective, and being aware of it, you can see how silly it is.
I’m sorry Adam died, but life perishes every day, dozens of times per day just so our own can continue, if you’re not vegan. And if you classify plants as life, then just as many if you are. I, personally, don’t let those deaths guide my decisions in life. Otherwise I’d be vegan, and I’d also be against AI. Of course, I’d also be against vehicles, electricity, medicine, and civilization itself. Those all cause deaths.
Instead, I’m pragmatic, and seek to minimize deaths. I think more lives can be saved through the use of AI than will be lost by its use. Same as eating animals for food, driving vehicles, utilizing electricity, taking medicine, and reshaping our environment for the purpose of civilization.
My point is I don’t think that someone dying is a justified reason to abandon or shun a technology. I wish that they had safeguards in place to prevent someone for using it to harm themselves or others, and I believe they have implemented some and continue to improve those implementations, but having lacked those safeguards isn’t a good reason to say the technology should be maligned.
