12 ms·
An image signals that the author put time and energy into the article and that they have an eye for detail. Even if it's an AI generated image because the autho
by amelius 6mo ago
An image signals that the author put time and energy into the article and that they have an eye for detail. Even if it's an AI generated image because the author still had to pick a fitting image.
- vkou 6mo agoIf that's the image they picked, I question their taste.
- Freak_NL 6mo agoTwo posters above found that the signal was more like “get ready for a gen-AI article filled with vague woolly sentences”. Wasn't there anything relevant available? Screenshots of the new tools in a before/after collage perhaps?
- wakamoleguy 6mo agoI disagree. Especially with AI, it’s far too easy to generate and insert an image with no time, energy, or eye for detail. Authors do it because it supposedly leads to better engagement, shows up bigger on social media, and breaks up the text. But generally, unless the visual content meaningfully adds to the text content, users will largely ignore it.
- pjc50 6mo agoAn AI image signals that the author did not put time and energy of their own in, they had the AI make it up. It's a yellow flag.
- Hamuko 6mo agoIf you generate an image that contains a bunch of low-quality gobbledegook, the signal that it sends is that you have zero eye for detail. Look at any single part of that image, and you will notice how little detail there actually is.
- captain_coffee 6mo agoI am 100% convinced that you are either trolling or that your comment is explicitly made in bad faith.