4 ms·
Honestly the output from this model was a little scary. I could always tell AI generated people and images prior to this But most of the images here are just m
by spaceman_2020 2y ago
Honestly the output from this model was a little scary. I could always tell AI generated people and images prior to this
But most of the images here are just mundane enough that they could have been taken by your average smartphone user
- mattgreenrocks 2y agoI definitely can’t tell, even knowing that these are from AI. GeoGuessr-like sites are going to get trolled hard with AI photos of nonexistent locations.
- _sys49152 2y agocityscapes and urban photography - only a handful of examples given but those images still got a ways to go
- slau 2y agoA bunch of the people images are very clearly AI though. I’d wager about 30-50% of them could be recognised as generated by people with a bit of understanding of how these models work.
- ninetyninenine 2y agonobody knows how these models work. Not even experts. These are black box algorithms where people understand these things in terms the analogy of a best fit curve in a series of data points. Outside of this analogy... nobody understands how generative AI works. What made a model for a specific situation choose to generate a hand with 6 fingers instead of 5? Or 5 instead of 6? Nobody knows.
- jprete 2y agoThat's well above the threshold for destroying even the pretense of photographs having any information value on the Internet.
- not2b 2y agoEven before generative AI was an issue, in the US you couldn't just tell a court "this is a photo, therefore it is evidence". There had to be witnesses would could testify about how that photo was produced, and the other side could cross-examine. But yes, you're already seeing politicians caught doing or saying embarrassing things claiming it's all a deepfake, but in most prominent cases of this there were lots of witnesses who can confirm that yes, they did say that.
- spaceman_2020 2y agoSure, but if you were out to use these images - maliciously or otherwise - you would just filter out the 30-50% that don’t look real.
- ninetyninenine 2y agoA little scary? You realize all the output generated by AI is only going to get more and more and more real right? Follow the trend line. You'll be seeing stories, movies and works of art better than humans in the not too far future.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]