3 ms·

Way too much AI-generated content in this post

outlier99 8mo ago
Pangram says fully human written https://www.pangram.com/history/02d6eff5-f782-4978-9e60-bb02d0466544/?ucc=gcJNTeQdxsV https://www.pangram.com/history/02d6eff5-f782-4978-9e60-bb02...
- DiscourseFan 8mo ago
  So the art isn't AI generated either? Idk why people trust these "AI checker" sites when they have been shown time and again to be inaccurate at best, often defamatory at worst.
  - bryantwolf 8mo ago
    I too am skeptical we’ll really be able to catch everyone. By making public tools we just create evals to beat the tools etc. Still, right now I think we can tell, so I focused on making sure they were my words, but I let an llm help edit and I think it honestly made it much more readable
MoltenMan 8mo ago
I don't think this post reads as AI at all. It has none of the tell-tale signs either (em dashes, common constructions like 'not just ____ but ____, bullet points, headers, etc.)
- FreakLegion 8mo ago
  The images are AI-generated. This makes them automatically bad in some people's view, but I think they're reasonably fitting here. With a little bit of work (e.g. attention to consistency between frames, blending into the site background) they could even be good.
  - bryantwolf 8mo ago
    I’d love some thoughts here on the consistency. I thougt I actually did pretty well! But I can see how I might be blind to mind own work here. What ruined it for you?
    - FreakLegion 8mo ago
      You did do pretty well! I don't think the final result was ruined at all. Not many people will notice things like his pants only being brown in the first image, or their eyes only having whites in the third image, or his jacket sometimes having a hood and sometimes not. Compared to what we see on most blogs, even patio11's, this is capital-A Art.
      - bryantwolf 8mo ago
        I actually thought a lot about the eye whites! He didn’t look nervous enough without them
    - tylerhou 8mo ago
      The art’s aesthetic, which resembles Calvin and Hobbes, is disrespectful to its creator, Bill Watterson’s. Bill spent a lot of energy fighting commercialization of his work, arguing that it would devalue his characters and their personalities. I don’t know what is cheaper than using an AI model to instantly generate similar art, for free.
YiBiwtiy 8mo ago
[dead]

Pangram says fully human written https://www.pangram.com/history/02d6eff5-f782-4978-9e60-bb02d0466544/?ucc=gcJNTeQdxsV https://www.pangram.com/history/02d6eff5-f782-4978-9e60-bb02...

DiscourseFan 8mo ago
So the art isn't AI generated either? Idk why people trust these "AI checker" sites when they have been shown time and again to be inaccurate at best, often defamatory at worst.
- bryantwolf 8mo ago
  I too am skeptical we’ll really be able to catch everyone. By making public tools we just create evals to beat the tools etc. Still, right now I think we can tell, so I focused on making sure they were my words, but I let an llm help edit and I think it honestly made it much more readable

MoltenMan 8mo ago

I don't think this post reads as AI at all. It has none of the tell-tale signs either (em dashes, common constructions like 'not just ____ but ____, bullet points, headers, etc.)

FreakLegion 8mo ago
The images are AI-generated. This makes them automatically bad in some people's view, but I think they're reasonably fitting here. With a little bit of work (e.g. attention to consistency between frames, blending into the site background) they could even be good.
- bryantwolf 8mo ago
  I’d love some thoughts here on the consistency. I thougt I actually did pretty well! But I can see how I might be blind to mind own work here. What ruined it for you?
  - FreakLegion 8mo ago
    You did do pretty well! I don't think the final result was ruined at all. Not many people will notice things like his pants only being brown in the first image, or their eyes only having whites in the third image, or his jacket sometimes having a hood and sometimes not. Compared to what we see on most blogs, even patio11's, this is capital-A Art.
    - bryantwolf 8mo ago
      I actually thought a lot about the eye whites! He didn’t look nervous enough without them
  - tylerhou 8mo ago
    The art’s aesthetic, which resembles Calvin and Hobbes, is disrespectful to its creator, Bill Watterson’s. Bill spent a lot of energy fighting commercialization of his work, arguing that it would devalue his characters and their personalities. I don’t know what is cheaper than using an AI model to instantly generate similar art, for free.

YiBiwtiy 8mo ago

[dead]