this post was submitted on 10 Sep 2026
793 points (99.1% liked)

Fuck AI

8171 readers
3334 users here now

"We did it, Patrick! We made a technological breakthrough!"

A place for all those who loathe AI to discuss things, post articles, and ridicule the AI hype. Proud supporter of working people. And proud booer of SXSW 2024.

AI, in this case, refers to LLMs, GPT technology, and anything listed as "AI" meant to increase market valuations.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] pulsewidth@lemmy.world 231 points 14 hours ago (4 children)

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.

[–] PostaL@lemmy.world 1 points 4 hours ago

If that's the case, everything on Instagram, heck, the internet, would be labeled as AI ...

[–] Kyrgizion@lemmy.world 84 points 13 hours ago (3 children)

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.

But the fact that they say their system is "advanced" and "refined", while they don't even add some guardrails as, i.e., date checks, that are the minimum one would expect to be added to reduce the likeliness of both false positives and false negatives. It's just stunning.

[–] Zombie@feddit.uk 47 points 8 hours ago

For anyone doubting Kyrgizion's claim:

[–] RampantParanoia2365@lemmy.world 5 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago)

And that's still not really how that works. Those checkers just aren't very good.

[–] HappyFrog@lemmy.blahaj.zone 38 points 12 hours ago (3 children)

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.

[–] ElegantBiscuit@lemmy.zip 1 points 17 minutes ago

The irony of people immediately and without hesitation to believe AI to fact check AI, and simultaneously increasingly anything that anyone does is accused of using AI, nearly every single time with zero evidence other than their own gut feeling. The wider internet is an increasingly miserable place to be, which is impressive that it somehow seems gets worse every year.

[–] Malica@lemmy.zip 2 points 41 minutes ago

I'm with you we need to chill

[–] OrteilGenou@lemmy.world 9 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

I don't follow, if content checkers are wrong for not being able to tell original art from AI slop because they have been trained on datasets that include the original art, why wouldn't they also be wrong for the same reason on newer art? They would still likely absorb that newer art into their datasets.

Okay after writing it out I get what you mean, but I am thinking that the turnaround time of absorbing new art, using it to produce AI slop requests a few dozen/hundred/million times, and then calling the original works AI because the AI sloptificator can no longer tell the difference will be a constant, unless there is some way to track OC across multiple AI agents in the panslopticon.

[–] HappyFrog@lemmy.blahaj.zone 13 points 9 hours ago (2 children)

AI content checkers will always be wrong. They'll always sometimes flag non-AI images as AI and AI images as human made some percentage of the time. I don't want artists to have to prove that their art is real, I want them to be able to make and share the content they want.

[–] RepleteLocum@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

New ai checkers are based on companies signing the response of the llm.

[–] HappyFrog@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 2 hours ago

Those are good as that puts the proof on the ai creators, not the artists.

[–] OrteilGenou@lemmy.world 1 points 4 hours ago

I agree, I am not sure how they can do this... Maybe release original art work with some kind of 2FA QR code to verify authenticity to the original author? That probably wouldn't work but you get my drift.