I've seen so, so many posts and comments get "AI claimed" for using technical language or polysyllabic words or complex sentences, just because people are illiterate and can't parse anything longer than 250 characters or more complex than See Spot Run.
... I also have a copy of The Collected Works of William Shakespeare that I'm ready and willing to use as a bludgeon.
I mean, there’s really nothing I can do to prove that I didn’t rely on AI, so I was like, “Sure, I’ll take out the em-dashes if that makes you think the text is human-written.”
Heck, I've had a Twitch streamer (jokingly) ask if I'm AI because I tend to write way too long messages in chat (To clarify, the streamer wasn't serious. Heck, I immediately went along with the joke. I really should get better at not writing overly long messages tho, because it is a bad habit of mine)
I find it very ironic that artists going on a crusade against AI made them scared of posting their own art because it might get bashed for looking AI generated
Saw a video of a simple homopolar motor a couple of weeks back, think it was on FB, and the comments were mainly people calling AI and/or fake, despite the concept not only being based on well understood physics, but also a common little fun physics demo that has been performed for decades..
It is easier than ever to just disregard anything you don't understand (or that goes against your world view) as being AI fakery.
One could basically make the world one's echo chamber, and instead of only hearing things one agree with, one can just 'reasonably' disregard everything one does not agree with.
Then you have people on the otherside not understanding A.I and believing every A.I video they see. I've got elderly parents sending me A.I slop on the regular thinking it's real. It's kinda hard to explain as a eternally online person how to see the difference to someone who's only online to be on Facebook.
I feel like the overlap is pretty big there too. The people clamoring to post “100% AI” on anything slightly uncommon or visually confusing are casually guzzling shitloads of AI content because they think they can identify it.
The flip side is “reasonably” accepting something that fits your worldview as well without validating. I think it’s more important than even to be skeptical of most things you see, especially things that do fit your worldview to avoid being caught in an echo chamber. But you are right, both sides of validation are important, validating that something is AI and validating that it is not, the issue is that it is becoming more difficult due to anyone having access to the tools to create fake content
Yeah, I think that's where we already are at, unfortunately. People decide if a news source is "biased and deceptive" or "honorable and trustworthy" by comparing it to what they already believe, and how well it aligns to what they believe is the base truth. Then, they compare other sources to it if they've decided it is reliable, and that leads to echo chambers and radicalization. When the truth is, I genuinely think almost all of the news is being twisted for narratives in one direction or anything.
I've yet to see a news organization that doesn't twist things sometimes, or sometimes you read a headline, but you actually read deeper, and it isn't as outlandish as claimed.
I heavily disagree. A lot of AI “logic” being used nowadays is based off of pure ignorance. (e.g. “No one would do that” or “This thing doesn’t work like that” when you are just unfamiliar and it may be possible or even common)
Unless people are willing to put it HEAVY research into their assumptions, it won’t work - it will only reinforce certain biases and become an echo chamber.
Me too. Honestly you can't always tell. People like to think they can always tell, but you can't. I've had people accuse me of AI in replies and posts... Insane because why would I take any amount of time to open a browser, go to chat gpt, and ask it to generate a post with any kind of specifics when I can just take half a second to comment my thoughts?
for me it was the fact that the back of the car looks almost drawn because of the low resolution and colours that made me be like could this pic be ai?
but regardless of that quite obvious that you should wear your seatbelt and stuff like this happens
Wow, interesting! To be honest, the angle of the car and the wheels threw me off, it looks like they are tilted at weird angles that don’t seem logical for a car accident. The way the car doors sit on the frame also seemed irregular, and other components of the picture seem unrecognizable, which is common in AI.
But I’ll admit, my skepticism came largely from the fact that AI slop videos like this one have become very common, since they have shock value and get lots of engagement. And, I realize that the goal of this subreddit is to push back against that type of cynicism and skepticism. So I guess I learned a lesson here.
All good. See, to me that just could be, it’s a car accident and we have no idea how the car hit. Seeing how it did hit makes way more sense with the damage too. It’s also not easy to see because it’s a smaller picture and when blown up can get distorted
It's an incredible freak accident where miraculously the driver suffered very light injuries, got flung out of the car in just the right way not to end up under it. It's easier to believe it's AI generated than something as unlikely as this happening
That being said it doesn't look at all like AI to me
Honestly, id much rather people question whether real videos are AI rather than have people think that AI videos are real. its so hard to tell nowadays
Im getting super tired of having to doubt every single thing i see if it's AI or not, and when i often get fooled ppl make fun of me that it's AI, like "how can you not see" BROTHER they look too realistic
It looks like the car came around that corner, lost control of the car. Went across the grass and rolled
The people in these comments saying “everyone should assume ai first” is why actual artists art are being called ai and ai “art” is being called art.
I've seen so, so many posts and comments get "AI claimed" for using technical language or polysyllabic words or complex sentences, just because people are illiterate and can't parse anything longer than 250 characters or more complex than See Spot Run.
... I also have a copy of The Collected Works of William Shakespeare that I'm ready and willing to use as a bludgeon.
I read an article where the author suggested writers shouldn’t write articles properly to avoid accusations of being ai smdh
I work in advertising and today, a vendor flagged something I wrote as “obvious AI” because I used a single set of em-dashes to break up a sentence.
The reason AI overuses em-dashes is because it’s trying to mimic human writing and—shocker—humans have used em-dashes for centuries.
What do you even do in response to that? “Nuh uh”?
I mean, there’s really nothing I can do to prove that I didn’t rely on AI, so I was like, “Sure, I’ll take out the em-dashes if that makes you think the text is human-written.”
Fair enough. You’re one of the first professionals I’ve met who I could even ask what happened next.
I’ve stopped using em dashes because was worried I would get accused of being AI. I’m still sad about it 😭
Heck, I've had a Twitch streamer (jokingly) ask if I'm AI because I tend to write way too long messages in chat (To clarify, the streamer wasn't serious. Heck, I immediately went along with the joke. I really should get better at not writing overly long messages tho, because it is a bad habit of mine)
I find it very ironic that artists going on a crusade against AI made them scared of posting their own art because it might get bashed for looking AI generated
Has it actually, though?
Exactly… jumping to “AI first” blurs the line and devalues real artists’ work.
Well no, it’s only the first one. It wouldn’t make any sense for it to lead to the second one.
And the issue of “artists being falsely accused of using AI” is blown out of proportion in the first place.
broski i've seen this kind of thing in real life and this actually very much tracks
unlike the car, or course
Indeed, these people are experiencing brainrot of a different kind
"It's ai" is the new "That's photoshop"
IMO it’s safer to assume something is AI and then validate rather than the other way around. We are in dangerous territory
Problem is that people skip the validation step.
Saw a video of a simple homopolar motor a couple of weeks back, think it was on FB, and the comments were mainly people calling AI and/or fake, despite the concept not only being based on well understood physics, but also a common little fun physics demo that has been performed for decades..
It is easier than ever to just disregard anything you don't understand (or that goes against your world view) as being AI fakery.
One could basically make the world one's echo chamber, and instead of only hearing things one agree with, one can just 'reasonably' disregard everything one does not agree with.
this is definitively 100% AI. source: just trust me bro
Then you have people on the otherside not understanding A.I and believing every A.I video they see. I've got elderly parents sending me A.I slop on the regular thinking it's real. It's kinda hard to explain as a eternally online person how to see the difference to someone who's only online to be on Facebook.
I feel like the overlap is pretty big there too. The people clamoring to post “100% AI” on anything slightly uncommon or visually confusing are casually guzzling shitloads of AI content because they think they can identify it.
The flip side is “reasonably” accepting something that fits your worldview as well without validating. I think it’s more important than even to be skeptical of most things you see, especially things that do fit your worldview to avoid being caught in an echo chamber. But you are right, both sides of validation are important, validating that something is AI and validating that it is not, the issue is that it is becoming more difficult due to anyone having access to the tools to create fake content
Yeah, I think that's where we already are at, unfortunately. People decide if a news source is "biased and deceptive" or "honorable and trustworthy" by comparing it to what they already believe, and how well it aligns to what they believe is the base truth. Then, they compare other sources to it if they've decided it is reliable, and that leads to echo chambers and radicalization. When the truth is, I genuinely think almost all of the news is being twisted for narratives in one direction or anything.
I've yet to see a news organization that doesn't twist things sometimes, or sometimes you read a headline, but you actually read deeper, and it isn't as outlandish as claimed.
I heavily disagree. A lot of AI “logic” being used nowadays is based off of pure ignorance. (e.g. “No one would do that” or “This thing doesn’t work like that” when you are just unfamiliar and it may be possible or even common)
Unless people are willing to put it HEAVY research into their assumptions, it won’t work - it will only reinforce certain biases and become an echo chamber.
Bro ai is a problem but yeah not everything is ai. People need to learn the actual identification tactics
Me too. Honestly you can't always tell. People like to think they can always tell, but you can't. I've had people accuse me of AI in replies and posts... Insane because why would I take any amount of time to open a browser, go to chat gpt, and ask it to generate a post with any kind of specifics when I can just take half a second to comment my thoughts?
I agree with your sentiment but… that picture does look suspiciously AI. Could just be a confusing perspective, but some things look very off.
It’s a frame from a video, do you not see it?
I do, but I can’t find the original post so this is all I have to go on.
What makes you think it’s ai?
This is just one article and there are videos of it happening
https://worldofbuzz.com/cctv-shows-woman-in-sarawak-thrown-from-car-in-freak-accident-gets-up-like-nothing-happened/#
for me it was the fact that the back of the car looks almost drawn because of the low resolution and colours that made me be like could this pic be ai?
but regardless of that quite obvious that you should wear your seatbelt and stuff like this happens
100%
Wow, interesting! To be honest, the angle of the car and the wheels threw me off, it looks like they are tilted at weird angles that don’t seem logical for a car accident. The way the car doors sit on the frame also seemed irregular, and other components of the picture seem unrecognizable, which is common in AI.
But I’ll admit, my skepticism came largely from the fact that AI slop videos like this one have become very common, since they have shock value and get lots of engagement. And, I realize that the goal of this subreddit is to push back against that type of cynicism and skepticism. So I guess I learned a lesson here.
All good. See, to me that just could be, it’s a car accident and we have no idea how the car hit. Seeing how it did hit makes way more sense with the damage too. It’s also not easy to see because it’s a smaller picture and when blown up can get distorted
It's an incredible freak accident where miraculously the driver suffered very light injuries, got flung out of the car in just the right way not to end up under it. It's easier to believe it's AI generated than something as unlikely as this happening
That being said it doesn't look at all like AI to me
Honestly, id much rather people question whether real videos are AI rather than have people think that AI videos are real. its so hard to tell nowadays
You can't blame people becoming paranoid with all the ai content everywhere
Im getting super tired of having to doubt every single thing i see if it's AI or not, and when i often get fooled ppl make fun of me that it's AI, like "how can you not see" BROTHER they look too realistic
Okay, but hear me out...
What about "AI+"