I bet this is because LLMs stole her art for training, so now that the LLM users have pumped out thousands of slop-art aping hers down to the colour palate and brushstrokes, her originals also get identified as also AI.
LLMs don’t steal art for training, image generation models are fed datasets by humans, which are then invoked by LLMs when prompted
While I don’t think you’re entirely wrong, I feel like this sentiment will lead people to believing AI content checkers more. The content checkers are wrong even for newer stuff. I always default to believing something is human made because I never want to accuse a real artist for using AI.
This is exactly it. Also the reason that inputting an excerpt of a classical text (cfr. Dracula, Frankenstein, …) returns “likely AI” results - it’s literally what it was trained on.
I had never heard of the artist before, and if you haven’t either, I cannot recommend giving her website a visit enough.
Insanely talented and really unique style.
The back edge of generated content that I don’t see a lot of discussion about is mislabeling real content, accidentally or not. It’s gonna have a monumental affect on how we consume media, even for those that want to avoid it.
Yep, this is the most important threat of Gen AI in my opinion. The erosion of trust, and the following devaluation of truth, is already hurting society so much. And it will only get worse.
Remember, it’s not just «did someone actually paint this?». It is also «did this actually happen?» and «did they actually say that?».
A promotional image I created for a local queer rally was deemed “AI” by the community (the image was actually the result of me sacrificing 8 hours of sleep.) The vitriol I was hit with, including one of my fellow committee members passive aggressively implying I was lying about it not being AI, was enough to make me no longer want to volunteer my time or skills for my own community.
Which is really fucking shitty. The increased lateral attacks happening because of Gen-AI pitting us against one another benefits those fucks at the top, and they didn’t even have to work for it.
Even caught myself mislabelling real art a few times, ai has destroyed our trust in genuine human stuff
That’s by design!
I think this labeling was probably done by AI.
Lots of “AI detector” tools for both images and text are AI, yes. People using them don’t realize the irony because everyone wants so badly to believe there’s a way to stop all the AI fakers.
edit: please, someone come up with an actually reliable way to detect AI art, something that’s not based on probabilities that will be skewed by real artists having their art used to train AI
It’s the same issue with people, there’s a shitload of vibe based accusations of AI over stuff people have actually made, written, whatever. Some AI stuff has that certain look and sometimes writes a certain way, but that’s stuff that people do, that’s why AI does it too. It’s just ending up mimicking people.
Don’t personally like that certain style, whether it was made by a human or not tbh.
if only there were platforms you could migrate to that wouldnt have this problem
This doesn’t work for artists who need to make a living. The art-buying audience is not on the platforms you are talking about.
Instagram also needs to “make a living”. They do that by making your life as an artist harder. You have to make a choice between using software that respects you and having a smaller following, or using a platform that, in every way that you can imagine, is abusing you.
They do make that choice. You just don’t like the result.
Neither do they, it would seem.
“You chose one of two possible bullshit options, now stop complaining that the result is bullshit.”
She literally made a platform like that.
They’d probably be distinctly socially liberal and full of Linux nerds. But who would want that?
Social media without fasicts?! Are you insane?!
If you think there are no fascists here…
At least they stand out here. There’s no such thing as a perfect security., you can only give it your best effort.
^-^
