• pulsewidth@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    83
    ·
    4 hours ago

    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.

    • Ex Nummis@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      3 hours ago

      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.

    • HappyFrog@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      3 hours ago

      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.

    • ඞmir@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      14
      ·
      2 hours ago

      LLMs don’t steal art for training, image generation models are fed datasets by humans, which are then invoked by LLMs when prompted

  • smiletolerantly@awful.systems
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    2 hours ago

    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.

  • Ech@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    56
    ·
    5 hours ago

    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.

    • f314@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      edit-2
      3 hours ago

      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?».

      • LycanGalen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 hour ago

        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.

    • inlandempire@jlai.lu
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      33
      ·
      4 hours ago

      Even caught myself mislabelling real art a few times, ai has destroyed our trust in genuine human stuff

    • ladybugs@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 hour ago

      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

        • Axolotl@feddit.it
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 minutes ago

          Text is trickier but for now the major signs are

          • corporate speech
          • “it’s not X — it’s Y”
          • em dashes used in the wrong place

          There are others but i can think only of those rn

    • NaibofTabr@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      37
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      5 hours ago

      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.

      • Turret3857@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 hours ago

        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.

            • CerebralHawks@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 minutes ago

              Then they gotta, as the saying goes, lay in the bed they made, except they’re (helping) making it for others, too.

              They want the benefit of the privacy-respecting network, they want the exposure of the artist-hostile network, but they don’t want to contribute to bringing their audience to the privacy-respecting network. That choice is 100% on them, then.

            • Lumidaub@feddit.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              3 hours ago

              “You chose one of two possible bullshit options, now stop complaining that the result is bullshit.”

    • Gullible@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      5 hours ago

      They’d probably be distinctly socially liberal and full of Linux nerds. But who would want that?

  • Saapas@piefed.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    4 hours ago

    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.