3 ms·

One of the images in the blog (https://images.ctfassets.net/kftzwdyauwt9/4d5dizAOajLfAXkGZ74DJh/f3c89f754604050c0980a0bc9de2091c/images-2-cornell.png?w=3840&q=9

One of the images in the blog (https://images.ctfassets.net/kftzwdyauwt9/4d5dizAOajLfAXkGZ74DJh/f3c89f754604050c0980a0bc9de2091c/images-2-cornell.png?w=3840&q=90&fm=webp https://images.ctfassets.net/kftzwdyauwt9/4d5dizAOajLfAXkGZ7...) is a carbon copy of an image from an article posted Mar 27, 2026 with credits given to an individual: https://www.cornellsun.com/article/2026/03/cornell-accepts-5-776-students-to-class-of-2030 https://www.cornellsun.com/article/2026/03/cornell-accepts-5... Was this an oversight? Or did their new image generation model generate an image that was essentially a copy of an existing image?

recitedropper 6mo ago
This is hilarious. Seems like kind of a random image for a model to memorize, but it could be. There is definitely enough empirical validation that shows image models retain lots of original copies in their weights, despite how much AI boosters think otherwise. That said, it is often images that end up in the training set many times, and I would think it strange for this image to do that. Regardless, great find.
- Nition 6mo ago
  I feel it's too much of a perfect match to be generated from the model's memory. It's pixel perfect. Gotta be a mistake.
minimaxir 6mo ago
Given the recency of that image, it is unlikely it is in the training data and therefore I would go with oversight.
- ajam1507 6mo ago
  The image is likely older than the article given this picture from over a year ago. https://www.instagram.com/p/DGQ01bzTwyo/ https://www.instagram.com/p/DGQ01bzTwyo/
  - afro88 6mo ago
    That's not the same picture
arjie 6mo ago
That has to be the wrong stock image included or something, bloody hell. magick image-l.webp image-r.jpg -compose difference -composite -auto-level -threshold 30% diff.png It's practically all dark except for a few spots. It's the same image just different size compression whatever. I can't find it in any stock image search, though. Surely it could not have memorized the whole image at that fidelity. Maybe I just didn't search well enough.
- Melatonic 6mo ago
  Or the image was generated with AI in the first place and a test for Images 2.0
  - arjie 6mo ago
    Haha! That would really take the cake. If it is, congratulations to them! I could never have known.
  - IsTom 6mo ago
    Well, it's on web archive. So unless they got their hands on it almost a month early or escaped their light cone it wasn't.
hersko 6mo ago
Wow. How did you catch this??
cubefox 6mo ago
I checked all the images on the blog post and I'm quite sure that the one you talk about isn't there.
- hahahacorn 6mo ago
  They removed it. I have screenshots on my blog. bengarcia.dev/archives

recitedropper 6mo ago

This is hilarious. Seems like kind of a random image for a model to memorize, but it could be. There is definitely enough empirical validation that shows image models retain lots of original copies in their weights, despite how much AI boosters think otherwise. That said, it is often images that end up in the training set many times, and I would think it strange for this image to do that. Regardless, great find.

Nition 6mo ago
I feel it's too much of a perfect match to be generated from the model's memory. It's pixel perfect. Gotta be a mistake.

minimaxir 6mo ago

Given the recency of that image, it is unlikely it is in the training data and therefore I would go with oversight.

ajam1507 6mo ago
The image is likely older than the article given this picture from over a year ago. https://www.instagram.com/p/DGQ01bzTwyo/ https://www.instagram.com/p/DGQ01bzTwyo/
- afro88 6mo ago
  That's not the same picture

arjie 6mo ago

That has to be the wrong stock image included or something, bloody hell. magick image-l.webp image-r.jpg -compose difference -composite -auto-level -threshold 30% diff.png It's practically all dark except for a few spots. It's the same image just different size compression whatever. I can't find it in any stock image search, though. Surely it could not have memorized the whole image at that fidelity. Maybe I just didn't search well enough.

Melatonic 6mo ago
Or the image was generated with AI in the first place and a test for Images 2.0
- arjie 6mo ago
  Haha! That would really take the cake. If it is, congratulations to them! I could never have known.
- IsTom 6mo ago
  Well, it's on web archive. So unless they got their hands on it almost a month early or escaped their light cone it wasn't.

hersko 6mo ago

Wow. How did you catch this??

cubefox 6mo ago

I checked all the images on the blog post and I'm quite sure that the one you talk about isn't there.

hahahacorn 6mo ago
They removed it. I have screenshots on my blog. bengarcia.dev/archives