5 ms·

These image gen models are getting so advanced and life like that increasingly the general public are being duped into believing AI images are actually real (ex

These image gen models are getting so advanced and life like that increasingly the general public are being duped into believing AI images are actually real (ex Facebook food images or fake OF models). Don't get me wrong I will enjoy the benefits of using this model for expressing myself better than ever before, but can't help feeling there's something also very insidious about these models too.

WarmWash 8mo ago
It's more likely than not that every single person who uses the internet has viewed an AI image and taken it as real by now. The obvious ones stand out, but there are so many that are indiscernible without spending lots of time digging through it. Even then there are ones that you can at best guess it's maybe AI gen.
- versk 8mo ago
  At the point now where basically any photo that isn't shared by someone I trust or a reputable news organisation is essentially unverifiable as being real or not The positive aspect of this advance is that I've basically stopped using social media because of the creeping sense that everything is slop
- yieldcrv 8mo ago
  people only notice when they are prompted to look for AI or scrutinize AI a lot of these accounts mix old clips with new AI clips or tag onto something emotional like a fake Epstein file image with your favorite politician, and pointing out its AI has people thinking you’re deflecting because you support the politician Meanwhile the engagement farmer is completely exempt from scrutiny Its fascinating how fast and unexpected the direction goes
- tokai 8mo ago
  Maybe not an actual argument for anything, but even before these image models everyone that used the internet had seen a doctored image they believed to be real. There was a reason that 'i can tell by the pixels' was a meme.
- WD-42 8mo ago
  People will continue to retreat into walled, trusted networks where they can have more confidence in the content they see. I can’t even be sure I’m responding to a real person right now.
  - akutlay 8mo ago
    As long as HackerNews community keeps the quality of the conversation high (with or without AI), I don’t think many of us will question this too much
    - abustamam 8mo ago
      Just the other day, I saw a comment on HN accuse another comment of being AI for no good reason. I personally thought the comment was fine. I know it's an unpopular opinion, but I don't really read too deeply into whether text is AI generated or not. On social platforms like HN I tend to just skim many comments anyway so it's not like the concept of "they spent no time writing so you shouldn't spend time reading" really applies. I know some people use apps like Grammarly to improve their language and stuff, which I can respect. But at what point do we draw the line between AI assisted text and AI generated text? I sometimes use AI to do research into the nuance of some topics to help me formulate a response and synthesize ideas, but if I ever get to the point where I'd be asking AI generate a response to the comment then I find it better to just not respond at all.
      - srh01 8mo ago
        I think it depends on the purpose of the comment. I can see why someone may get frustrated with AI text if they were say looking for advice on xyz, as you'd usually want someone with personal or senior experience. If I want career advice, AI will give me a predictable response similar to LinkedIn, but something from a successful person in the industry will have a lot more trust and substance in it.
- yen223 8mo ago
  At least some of the comments here are likely AI-generated
techpression 8mo ago
Oh we’ve seen nothing yet of the chaos that generative ai will unleash on the world, looking at Meta platforms it’s already a multi million dollar industry of selling something or someone that doesn’t exist. And that’s just the benign stuff.
whynotmaybe 8mo ago
>fake OF models Soon many real OF models will be out of job when everyone will be able to produce content to their personal taste from a few prompts.
- baal80spam 8mo ago
  And this can't come soon enough.
  - noumenon1111 8mo ago
    Coming soon... YOU!
- coldtea 8mo ago
  And they might have to gasp! get an honest job!
  - switchbak 8mo ago
    I don't know much about that side of things, but I presume that's hard work! Maybe not always so honest though.
  - xfeeefeee 8mo ago
    That's a pretty wide brush you are painting with there
    - coldtea 8mo ago
      That OF is not a honest job? That's the narrowest of brushes. Anybody thinking otherwise is the one painting with an overly broad mind, and not in a good way.
- pousada 8mo ago
  You can’t really because these powerful models are censored. You can create lewd pictures with open models but they aren’t nearly as good or easy to use.
kevincox 8mo ago
I actually think this was a good thing. Manipulating images incredibly convincingly was already possible but the cost was high (many hours of highly skilled work). So many people assumed that most images they were seeing were "authentic" without much consideration. By making these fake images ubiquitous we are forcing people to quickly learn that they can't believe what they see on the internet and tracking down sources and deciding who you trust is critically important. People have always said that you can't believe what you see on the internet, but unfortunately many people have managed without major issue ignoring this advice. This wave will force them to take that advice to heart by default.
- lm28469 8mo ago
  I feel like there is one or two generations of people who are tech savy and not 100% gullible when it comes to online things. Older and younger generations are both completely lost imho, in a blind test you wouldn't discern a monkey from a human scrolling tiktok &co
  - manuelabeledo 8mo ago
    How so? This "tech savvy and not 100% gullible" generation, gave birth to a political landscape dominated by online ragebait.
    - lm28469 8mo ago
      Boomers used to tell us to never trust anything online and now they send their life savings to "Brad Pitt" New generations gets unlimited brain rot delivered through infinite scroll, don't know what a folder is, think everything is "an app" and keep falling for the "technology will free us from work and cure cancer" There was a sweet spot during which you could grow alongside the internet at a pace that was still manageable and when companies and scammers weren't trying so hard to robbyou from your time money and attention
- manuelabeledo 8mo ago
  > By making these fake images ubiquitous we are forcing people to quickly learn that they can't believe what they see on the internet and tracking down sources and deciding who you trust is critically important. Has this thought process ever worked in real life? I know plenty of seniors who still believe everything that comes out of Facebook, be AI or not, and before that it was the TV, radio, newspapers, etc. Most people choose to believe, which is why they have a hard time confronting facts.
throwaway613746 8mo ago
[dead]
fortyseven 8mo ago
It's shitty, but I think it's almost as bad that people are calling everything AI. And I can't even blame them, despite how infuriating it is. It's just as insidious that even mundane things literally ARE AI now. I've seen at least twice now (that I'm aware of) where some cute, harmless, otherwise non-outrageous animal video was hiding a Sora watermark. So the crazy shit is AI. The mundane shit is AI. You wonder why everyone is calling everything AI now. :P
- switchbak 8mo ago
  It seems like a low level paranoia - now I find myself double checking that the youtube video I'm watching isn't some AI slop. All the creators use Getty b-rolls and increasingly AI generated stuff so much that it's not a far stretch to have the voice and script all be auto generated too. I suppose if the AI was able to tell me a true and compelling story, I might not even mind so much. I just don't want to be spoon fed drivel for 15 minutes to find it was all complete made up BS.
Havoc 8mo ago
Don’t think the demand for real OF is going anywhere
- derwiki 8mo ago
  How do you know they’re real right now?
  - JasonADrury 8mo ago
    A lot of escorts have OF profiles.
vunderba 8mo ago
Jaded, but if I knew there was a possibility of a bunch of incriminating footage of me (images, video, etc.) out there in the pre-AI days, I would do my absolute best to flood the internet with as many related deepfakes (including of myself) as possible.
dfxm12 8mo ago
This has been true for a while with digital art, photoshop, etc. Over time, people's BS detectors get tuned. I mean, scrolling by quickly in a feed, yeah, you might miss if an image is "real" or not, but if you see a series of photos side by side of the same subject (like an OF model), you'll figure it out. Also, using AI will not allow you to better express yourself. To use an analogy, it will not put your self-expression into any better focus, but just apply one of the stock IG filters to it.
- itintheory 8mo ago
  > a series of photos side by side of the same subject Cameras are now "enhancing" photos with AI automatically. The contents of a 'real' photo are increasingly generated. The line is blurring and it's only going to get worse.
neogodless 8mo ago
> Facebook food images or fake OF models What in the world is a fake OF model? Does "OF" stand for "of food"?
- bena 8mo ago
  It stands for "OnlyFans" a website originally for creators to engage directly with their audiences but quickly became a website where women sold explicit pictures of themselves to subscribers.
  - sebzim4500 8mo ago
    TIL it wasn't created to be a porn site
    - bena 8mo ago
      They still run ads trying to push the narrative that it's for comedians and musicians. But at this point, OnlyFans is so synonymous with egirls that suggesting someone has an account is used as a way to insinuate they sell pictures of themselves.
pancakeguy 8mo ago
Surely this is a problem that we will never be able to solve.

WarmWash 8mo ago

It's more likely than not that every single person who uses the internet has viewed an AI image and taken it as real by now. The obvious ones stand out, but there are so many that are indiscernible without spending lots of time digging through it. Even then there are ones that you can at best guess it's maybe AI gen.

versk 8mo ago
At the point now where basically any photo that isn't shared by someone I trust or a reputable news organisation is essentially unverifiable as being real or not The positive aspect of this advance is that I've basically stopped using social media because of the creeping sense that everything is slop
yieldcrv 8mo ago
people only notice when they are prompted to look for AI or scrutinize AI a lot of these accounts mix old clips with new AI clips or tag onto something emotional like a fake Epstein file image with your favorite politician, and pointing out its AI has people thinking you’re deflecting because you support the politician Meanwhile the engagement farmer is completely exempt from scrutiny Its fascinating how fast and unexpected the direction goes
tokai 8mo ago
Maybe not an actual argument for anything, but even before these image models everyone that used the internet had seen a doctored image they believed to be real. There was a reason that 'i can tell by the pixels' was a meme.
WD-42 8mo ago
People will continue to retreat into walled, trusted networks where they can have more confidence in the content they see. I can’t even be sure I’m responding to a real person right now.
- akutlay 8mo ago
  As long as HackerNews community keeps the quality of the conversation high (with or without AI), I don’t think many of us will question this too much
  - abustamam 8mo ago
    Just the other day, I saw a comment on HN accuse another comment of being AI for no good reason. I personally thought the comment was fine. I know it's an unpopular opinion, but I don't really read too deeply into whether text is AI generated or not. On social platforms like HN I tend to just skim many comments anyway so it's not like the concept of "they spent no time writing so you shouldn't spend time reading" really applies. I know some people use apps like Grammarly to improve their language and stuff, which I can respect. But at what point do we draw the line between AI assisted text and AI generated text? I sometimes use AI to do research into the nuance of some topics to help me formulate a response and synthesize ideas, but if I ever get to the point where I'd be asking AI generate a response to the comment then I find it better to just not respond at all.
    - srh01 8mo ago
      I think it depends on the purpose of the comment. I can see why someone may get frustrated with AI text if they were say looking for advice on xyz, as you'd usually want someone with personal or senior experience. If I want career advice, AI will give me a predictable response similar to LinkedIn, but something from a successful person in the industry will have a lot more trust and substance in it.
yen223 8mo ago
At least some of the comments here are likely AI-generated

techpression 8mo ago

Oh we’ve seen nothing yet of the chaos that generative ai will unleash on the world, looking at Meta platforms it’s already a multi million dollar industry of selling something or someone that doesn’t exist. And that’s just the benign stuff.

whynotmaybe 8mo ago

>fake OF models Soon many real OF models will be out of job when everyone will be able to produce content to their personal taste from a few prompts.

baal80spam 8mo ago
And this can't come soon enough.
- noumenon1111 8mo ago
  Coming soon... YOU!
coldtea 8mo ago
And they might have to gasp! get an honest job!
- switchbak 8mo ago
  I don't know much about that side of things, but I presume that's hard work! Maybe not always so honest though.
- xfeeefeee 8mo ago
  That's a pretty wide brush you are painting with there
  - coldtea 8mo ago
    That OF is not a honest job? That's the narrowest of brushes. Anybody thinking otherwise is the one painting with an overly broad mind, and not in a good way.
pousada 8mo ago
You can’t really because these powerful models are censored. You can create lewd pictures with open models but they aren’t nearly as good or easy to use.

kevincox 8mo ago

I actually think this was a good thing. Manipulating images incredibly convincingly was already possible but the cost was high (many hours of highly skilled work). So many people assumed that most images they were seeing were "authentic" without much consideration. By making these fake images ubiquitous we are forcing people to quickly learn that they can't believe what they see on the internet and tracking down sources and deciding who you trust is critically important. People have always said that you can't believe what you see on the internet, but unfortunately many people have managed without major issue ignoring this advice. This wave will force them to take that advice to heart by default.

lm28469 8mo ago
I feel like there is one or two generations of people who are tech savy and not 100% gullible when it comes to online things. Older and younger generations are both completely lost imho, in a blind test you wouldn't discern a monkey from a human scrolling tiktok &co
- manuelabeledo 8mo ago
  How so? This "tech savvy and not 100% gullible" generation, gave birth to a political landscape dominated by online ragebait.
  - lm28469 8mo ago
    Boomers used to tell us to never trust anything online and now they send their life savings to "Brad Pitt" New generations gets unlimited brain rot delivered through infinite scroll, don't know what a folder is, think everything is "an app" and keep falling for the "technology will free us from work and cure cancer" There was a sweet spot during which you could grow alongside the internet at a pace that was still manageable and when companies and scammers weren't trying so hard to robbyou from your time money and attention
manuelabeledo 8mo ago
> By making these fake images ubiquitous we are forcing people to quickly learn that they can't believe what they see on the internet and tracking down sources and deciding who you trust is critically important. Has this thought process ever worked in real life? I know plenty of seniors who still believe everything that comes out of Facebook, be AI or not, and before that it was the TV, radio, newspapers, etc. Most people choose to believe, which is why they have a hard time confronting facts.

throwaway613746 8mo ago

[dead]

fortyseven 8mo ago

It's shitty, but I think it's almost as bad that people are calling everything AI. And I can't even blame them, despite how infuriating it is. It's just as insidious that even mundane things literally ARE AI now. I've seen at least twice now (that I'm aware of) where some cute, harmless, otherwise non-outrageous animal video was hiding a Sora watermark. So the crazy shit is AI. The mundane shit is AI. You wonder why everyone is calling everything AI now. :P

switchbak 8mo ago
It seems like a low level paranoia - now I find myself double checking that the youtube video I'm watching isn't some AI slop. All the creators use Getty b-rolls and increasingly AI generated stuff so much that it's not a far stretch to have the voice and script all be auto generated too. I suppose if the AI was able to tell me a true and compelling story, I might not even mind so much. I just don't want to be spoon fed drivel for 15 minutes to find it was all complete made up BS.

Havoc 8mo ago

Don’t think the demand for real OF is going anywhere

derwiki 8mo ago
How do you know they’re real right now?
- JasonADrury 8mo ago
  A lot of escorts have OF profiles.

vunderba 8mo ago

Jaded, but if I knew there was a possibility of a bunch of incriminating footage of me (images, video, etc.) out there in the pre-AI days, I would do my absolute best to flood the internet with as many related deepfakes (including of myself) as possible.

dfxm12 8mo ago

This has been true for a while with digital art, photoshop, etc. Over time, people's BS detectors get tuned. I mean, scrolling by quickly in a feed, yeah, you might miss if an image is "real" or not, but if you see a series of photos side by side of the same subject (like an OF model), you'll figure it out. Also, using AI will not allow you to better express yourself. To use an analogy, it will not put your self-expression into any better focus, but just apply one of the stock IG filters to it.

itintheory 8mo ago
> a series of photos side by side of the same subject Cameras are now "enhancing" photos with AI automatically. The contents of a 'real' photo are increasingly generated. The line is blurring and it's only going to get worse.

neogodless 8mo ago

> Facebook food images or fake OF models What in the world is a fake OF model? Does "OF" stand for "of food"?

bena 8mo ago
It stands for "OnlyFans" a website originally for creators to engage directly with their audiences but quickly became a website where women sold explicit pictures of themselves to subscribers.
- sebzim4500 8mo ago
  TIL it wasn't created to be a porn site
  - bena 8mo ago
    They still run ads trying to push the narrative that it's for comedians and musicians. But at this point, OnlyFans is so synonymous with egirls that suggesting someone has an account is used as a way to insinuate they sell pictures of themselves.

pancakeguy 8mo ago

Surely this is a problem that we will never be able to solve.