• ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    With the majority being in CS fields and having used ai image generation before they likely would be better at picking out than the average person

    • bitsplease@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      You’d think, but according to OP they were basically the same, slightly worse actually, which is interesting

      • ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        The ones using image generation did slightly better

        I was more commenting it to point out that it’s not necessary to find that person who can totally tell because they can’t

    • lloram239@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Even when you know what you are looking for, you are basically pixel hunting for artifacts or other signs that show it’s AI without the image actually looking fake, e.g. the avocado one was easy to tell, as ever since DALLE1 avocado related things have been used as test images, the https://thispersondoesnotexist.com/ one was obvious due to how it was framed and some of the landscapes had that noise-vegetation-look that AI images tend to have. But none of the images look fake just by themselves, if you didn’t specifically look for AI artifacts, it would be impossible to tell the difference or even notice that there is anything wrong with the image to begin with.