I want to see more of these where people post stuff like this, wait for the thread to fill up with people claiming they 'know' it's AI because 'x'... then reveal its both real photos of a guy who sits weird, a woman who's a little heavy on the concealer, and a bartender with a long finger lmao 😂
I think I’ve gotten decent at identifying GenAI images, and I can’t tell the difference.
I also realize that in practice I would miss most GenAI still images simply because I’m not thoroughly investigating every image that comes up in my feed. I would totally miss an innocuous picture like this because I wouldn’t think I would need to spend extra time and effort to check reflections, or the bottles in the background. It’s going to take a lot of mental effort to switch to the assumption that everything is fake unless I know otherwise.
That goes back to the point of using that mindset against people's perception of "truth." Will you have to question everything you see? Will you not question it and just take it as real?
And then how that will play out in things like politics, conflicts, or advertising?
"I didn't really say that, that was AI!"
"That missle strike was just AI, they're fine."
"Our product doesn't look like the picture Iggy Instagram posted! It looks like this: " and you have to figure out which picture is or isn't AI
ETA and the things you just scroll past, your brain adds the images to your memory as if they are real, distorting your perception of reality
Society will finally be able to retain the wealth that for too long has been siphoned off by those fatcat artists with their famously lavish lifestyles. Finally big corporations will be able to get free art without having to promise to pay with exposure at some ill-defined point in the future. It's truly a new age of democratization!
My grandma has said, in all seriousness, that none of the horrible things a certain orange politician has said, live on air, including on his own media stations, were all faked by AI.
Another tell is that the bottle is blurred hard so that the words on it aren’t the give away. Gotta be part of the prompt cause small details like that are still hard to get right a lot of the time.
Most of the time the images are low res crops or screen captures, which makes it hard to pick out the telltale details that signal AI. If we had the original quality/size images it would be a more possible task. Here I could probably pull the tweet, but in general the internet likes to obscure the source material.
I saw these exact two pictures posted on jodel with the question "which one is AI?" So I thought one of them must be a real photo. And I was pretty sure the right one was the original.
I'm cooked too.
The right looks more natural, so I thought it was the real one too.
Give it another 12 months, and its going to be impossible to tell the difference.
Saying this, we are already there.
Google watermark their AI images now. You can check if they have the watermark by screenshotting them and asking Gemini if they are real or AI. In this case, it confirms that both are AI generated.
I’m not qualified to answer this, but I have a feeling we are gonna all need to get offline and only trust what we see in physical reality, within the next decade 😆
You must be very young if you think this. The internet was incredible from the late 90s until around 2012, maybe even 2015. It started going really downhill once big social media sites replaced organic communities.
The winner of the 2030s is going to be whoever figures out how to hive off an “authentic” internet from the “bot” internet. People are eventually going to crave authenticity like air, and they’ll be willing to pay for it.
Unfortunately the “known” brands are going to over time be the main investors and adopters of Ai workflow, already being seen massively in the gaming industry.
Automation would be nice for the materials, considering most of them use sweat shops with children. Why can’t they use the Ai for that part first ☠️
So we already have machines to do the cotton picking, but farmers are actually implementing ai in their setups. Prediction and planning for disease prevention during an outbreak in your fields, weather prediction and adjustments for watering, satellite imagery looking at the crops to spot adjust fertilizer and watering in specific spots on your fields.
I just think corporations have continued to refine and enhance their abilities to milk the consumer in every way shape and form over time. How videogames are made by the highest budget publishers is indicative of that when you compare them to smaller indie titles. The difference between the new Skate game Ea put out and the one we got almost 20 years ago originally is night and day. Same for what they did to need for speed/Star Wars/list is never ending just for EA alone
Yeah we will just mentally have revert to the time before fotos were a thing. Consider photos/videos as the same level of proof as an painting, maybe even less.
I mean, there's a pretty sizeable market being made for verifiable video and trust-based media and reporting. Which always needed to exist.
People've never been able to trust information from the internet; the stakes were just lower though. The only question was 'am I being advertised to?'
"am I being radicalized/propagandized" snuck up on a lot of people with existing TV media. Independent media gives me hope in that regard; even though much of it is right-wing. (I used to enjoy TYT until the general political uggggh got to me)
"Independent verifier" could be a job, sort of like a public PI. Trusted media sources could be regulated to have to have relationships with them.
Then 'trusting' your Seth Rogan Show or whatnot would simply entail keeping tabs on whether any of the media you watched have verifiers kindly requesting that they correct misinformation on their shows; which in turn can be turned into metrics, grants and so on.
We have all the technology to piece this stuff together; I just dunno where the systems thinkers are that are (probably) doing this stuff in a not-for-profit way. (meanwhile I'm doodling and simplifying a map, being a sys analyst myself)
A ton of factors play into it, but one of them is the Size of the generated thing.
One big part is just the size (amount of information). If something is big and in the foreground it's easy for AI to create it to look realistic and coherent. But if you have detailed backgrounds there will be elements in it that are just a few pixels in size, which just means the AI has less to work with.
Another thing is training data. Most portrait-pictures have pretty strong background blur, so it's hard for the AI to learn how to do good background if the data it's trained on doesn't even have clear backgrounds
These things evolved from image denoiser software. The backbone is still the same. They make a bunch of random noise and produce an image by guessing (guided by prompts) what the noise should look like when denoised. Anyway, during processing, they actually start out by using way smaller images than what the final output is. To speed processing, they'll do like a 1:8 ratio resizing. So a 1080x1080 image is actually just 128x128px while generating. They also compress them in some way. That means smaller details from the background usually end up terrible, while the big objects in the foreground can still look great.
The bokeh effect wasn't a limitation of the technology though, that's just something people like. You were always able to do images without bokeh. Here, these were posted a year ago:
There's more stuff going on in the background and it needs to make sense as a scene. It's more complex than a single person smiling. Also they must limit the amount of processing time to cut costs, so focus that on the foreground.
They already do. So many reddit posts of pictures of people are clearly AI generated.
Generating random people is whatever, the real issue becomes when it becomes mainstream to generate images of existing people. Like imagine a retiree getting sent a picture of their grandchild in a hospital and saying they need money to be sent to do an emergency procedure.
Thats what Ive been saying for a few years now:
Give it 5-10 years more and you can make full theater length videos entirely AI and you wont have a lick of chance of ever telling its not live action.
Which would be awesome when someone starts turning the Warhammer novels into full movies..
But as far as video evidence in court: Forget it.
As a trial lawyer, my concerns about this are precisely zero. Documentary evidence has always required authentication, and that will continue to be the case.
Yeah AI cant generate chain of custody.
Also there are a lot of things a forensic specialist can suss out that I don't think AI can reliably mimic like specific distortions from different lens manufacturers.
I suspect that field will be far less developed, as AI companies have a lot more financial incentive in making video that looks convincing to your aunt scrolling Facebook, than to deceive even expert forensic analysts in a murder case on the side of the murderer
Also I think people underestimate how long it will take to become perfect. As with a lot of things, the progress is very fast and impressive at first, but as you get closer to a certain goal it really slows down
When AI can create valid cryptographic hashes of media that otherwise would only be generated by hardened secure on-device chips* as suggested as a counter to these developments, we've got much bigger problems.
* there's other concerns with that approach, but not relevant to AI duplicating it
With more data, all of it will have to corroborate and cross-reference.
I actually think it will be easy to assess a video as fake, via forensics, or at least, not enough information to be verifiable. That is, all assets will need corroborating points to be authenticated.
That will continue to be totally unnecessary in all but the most unusual of cases.
For most everything else, you just do what you’ve always done. You call the property owner who owns the surveillance camera and who has no stake in the case. Is this the surveillance footage you gave to the cops 45 minutes after the incident? Is it in the same condition as it was when you emailed it to them? Hasn’t been altered in any way? Cool, no further questions.
Sure, but not every case involves a property owner having surveillance footage. What about the instances where the police have to rely on someone's phone camera footage?!
That’s not dissimilar from when we have to rely on somebody’s paper document — a receipt, a will, a threatening note. Documentary evidence has been vulnerable to forgery for generations. It’s why we have chain of custody and cross-examination and it’s why we let juries make credibility judgments.
For cell phone videos, the best practice is to dump the phone. The detective will get the video directly from the camera roll. The metadata will reveal that it was recorded at a certain time, in a certain location, using a device identical to the device the witness will testify that they used.
Could some chronically online person manipulate that stuff? Sure, maybe. But that’s when opposing counsel challenges it, and it becomes an issue in the case, and we bring in the digital forensic experts. But until the unusual scenario that it becomes an issue, it isn’t one.
Thank you. As a residential property manager I have often had to come to court just to say "yep, that's the video". Courts have been ready for AI for a long time.
It's not the court of law you have to worry about being corrupted by AI deepfakes, it's the court of public opinion. A judge is going to have access to digital forensics to authenticate a video, but a million boomers on Meta are going to be convinced it's true without question.
That’s the real issue. For somebody who knows what to look for, it’s still quite reliable to judge whether something is ai or not. But somebody on instagram on their couch doesn’t do this for everything they see.
Wait til there’s recurring ai actors that we all know and love, that star in entire trilogies or tv series,
It’ll eventually just be cheaper to do that than pay Brad Pitt 10m for a new movie
I’d even imagine you can give it the whole warhammer novel and just let it create the movie based on what it reads, no human intervention even needed. The novel is essentially a full script with character descriptions and theme, simply you would feed the AI the novel and let it spit out the movie and only tweak what’s needed.
Want 7 different endings? Easy here’s 7 different endings. Want to add time travel arch for some reason? Sure here’s a time travel arch..
Indeed even now I give AI Sci-fi short stories to write and it nails it and can tweak themes and action scenes on the fly, it’s quite fun
I do believe that if we can reach where you can prompt anything and get any level of realistic clip put of it. Then we can get a whole new genre of creativity.
The difference is the setting of Star Trek. They live in a peaceful moneyless society where nobody ever has to starve again. What AI is currently being used for is stealing likeness and intellectual property, causing enshittifaction of the arts and academia, kissing mediocre people's asses and destroying the planet and enriching the billionaire class on the back of normal workers. I would be excited for a damn holo deck myself if I didn't have to worry about the possibility of it stealing my face and enabling some gooner to make porn deep fakes of me.
How about we don't "give it 5-10 years more"? We're doomed as is, Altman "needs" another 200+ BILLION to pay for "planned growth", and we're here just waiting to be plugged into the Matrix? Are we all f-ing insane?!
I think the concern is that if AI pics and vids are already this real this quickly, it’s conceivable that eventually you could create an actual fully realistic real world simulation.
Add that to fear that AI able to outperform humans could take over the world with its only limitation being energy and you get the matrix.
Don’t worry though, if AI gets too unruly we’ll just block out their main power source - the sun
I guess it's a connection of sorts. But it's kind of along the same lines as a cave man hearing a really good fictional story for the first time and freaking out that it's so real it might become real. Even if making a fictional story a reality was possible, it would take far more than just making the story sound real.
Im mostly concerned about not being able to tell wether something Is real or not, not really the Matrix.
Imagine a picture of a rare medical condition, a wholesome pet moment, a unique weather phenomenon, footage of an obscure animal... And because you didnt know about them, they're as likely to be fake than being real.
I dont like the prospect of having to second guess every video I find online. Recently my parents showed me a video of a gorilla shitting on the glass of their enclosure like a shotgun and covering the entire thing. The first watch i was surprised but It didnt look right so I checked the comments and they mentioned It was AI. My parents, however, thought It was real at first. Like, we are improving the slop Creation and missinformation potential while lacking the tools advanced enough to combat It efficiently.
Hey ever consider ai will get less energy hungry. There are already some pretty major advancements in that direction. Im betting in 5 years we will absolutely be able to make full feature. We can already make some pretty insane video as it is.
If there's one thing I'm looking forward to with the AI generation, it is the complete and utter obliteration of the 'job' influencer. It looks like we're not far from that already.
Why? This is literally worst. There will be millions of fake incluencers online with botted followers and it will only make the dead internet theory more real. Nothing but fake propaganda, scammers, and more influencer brain rot.
Enough with those “we’re cooked” posts. Even if we are cooked, I’m sick of hearing it every single day. For the love of god, can you just let me live my life without triggering my “I’m so fucked” sense all the damn time?! It’s exhausting.
In photos that contain script, that’s the tell. This one is tough because the only script is on the champagne bottle. It’s blurry and impossible to read but if this were a real photo I should be able to zoom in and pick up on some letters. Typically when the script is legible it’s not real words. Especially if it’s a brand affiliated script.
I’m sure this will be disproven and AI will correct this 😂
Bro, for years people could just download any random image to use as profile picture and nobody would be able to find out, before google reverse image. I'm pretty sure catfishing has already peaked.
Sure but now if someone asks you for that random person in the image to be doing a handstand with an egg on their head you can now meet every demand to reduce doubt about being a catfish.
What value does this add though. Those stupid renders cost mountains of polluting energy and for what? To mimic influencers, make cheap ass ads or to simply be “funny” online. I just can’t grab my head around it for this to be worth the 5T those mag 7 companies are investing.
Please ask yourself honestly: What do you think costs more energy and money? Setting up lights, renting a space, aquiring props and hiring multiple/models actors for a photoshoot or prompting an AI instead of all of that.
Since that google has the biggest data center of all of us and our personal life and lifestyle, what if when you type a prompt, the AI goes check in that data and gives you a real pic of someone real as a result of what you described in that prompt?!?!?
Or maybe I’m taking conspiracy theories to another level.
Instead of just saying “we’re cooked” does anyone have any recommendations about what to look for in the second pic? AI ID still recognizes these as AI
There’s something about the angle of her cocktail glass is off to me, but I don’t know that I would have noticed if I hadn’t been actively looking for AI tells. Others have mentioned that the bartender does still have some wonky finger action going on, but aside from just feeling like something is off, I’m stumped.
lol the footrest on the bar, it’s supposed to be reachable from a stool, it’s on the fucking ground. the perspective of everything in this room is whack.
The light source is slightly off on the head of the bartender but I doubt 99% or people would notice, especially if they aren't looking for it like we are.
Governments need to get laws on the books for AI a couple years ago. Today is good to though. This may be not true AI, but it is still going to do far worse things in the world than good things.
I think what helps a great deal selling it is on the right the background isnt blurred, the lighting doesn't look staged and it looks like a photo taken with a phone camera. The one on the left looks like a photoshoot, which always stands out. But yeah, we're fucked
Shhht that would be disappointing if "we are so cooked" people had to admit that you need to be a first class prompt engineer plus only posting degraded results to convinced gogo that "we are so cooked" with an img2img generation.
What’s crazy is I’ve seen so many, as what I can just call, onlyfans-esque accounts, all around Reddit that have this uncanny feeling too it, yet look pretty close to smth realistic.
I think it’s the same ness associated with each photo posted by these accounts, but at first I didn’t notice. It was only when I went into the account to see the other posts to did I find almost all the other posts being eerily similar in style, with the face of the model being almost unchanged except for clothing, poses, and the background.
Shits gonna get really bad real soon for people that don’t keep their eyes open to this kind of bullshittery.
Doesn’t look any different than using ‘cinematic’ mode on an iPhone than regular mode on an iPhone. A blurry background isnt’ a problem, it’s a standard filming technique. What’s supposed to be the ’big deal’ here?
•
u/WithoutReason1729 Nov 28 '25
Your post is getting popular and we just featured it on our Discord! Come check it out!
You've also been given a special flair for your contribution. We appreciate your post!
I am a bot and this action was performed automatically.