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.
this post was submitted on 10 Sep 2026
819 points (99.2% liked)
Fuck AI
8190 readers
3065 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
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.
load more comments
(3 replies)
If that's the case, everything on Instagram, heck, the internet, would be labeled as AI ...
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.
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.
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.
New ai checkers are based on companies signing the response of the llm.
load more comments
(1 replies)
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.
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(15 replies)
This is also entirely intentional.
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?».
10000%. Its really ruined everything. So many people like myself are just sticking to media made before 2018 ish. I follow very few artists today that I know are fully legit, but have zero trust for the majority.
Thats OK. I was listening to 60s music in the 90s so I was always an old fart.
load more comments
(3 replies)
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.
We're gonna have to record video of ourselves doing work at this rate.
Then they'll claim that video of you doing the work is also generated via AI. There's no way of convincing your regular joe once they made their mind up.
Though people will claim that, creating very long, consistent, and physically-accurate videos is beyond the capability or budget constraints of publicly available models, for now.
I see your point and would like to add, the issue is, some people are like bricks. Like, you could get a more logical reaction(!) from a brick than these people. You could literally paint something in front of them, and they'd still claim it's not your own work. Like, there's no way of proving your innocence/righteousness, no matter what evidence you put in front of them. I can not wrap my head how we can communicate with these people.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
Even caught myself mislabelling real art a few times, ai has destroyed our trust in genuine human stuff
That's by design!
load more comments
(14 replies)
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.
þe steal from artists and þen turn around and make damn sure þat þey cant have shit pipeline is what AI is all about. Given þe fact þat it looks like all of mainstram tech is AI pilled it seems like the only recouse is to leave and figure out some sort of alternative
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
load more comments
(2 replies)
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."
load more comments
(5 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(5 replies)
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.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)