this post was submitted on 28 Jun 2026
460 points (96.9% liked)
me_irl
7969 readers
693 users here now
All posts need to have the same title: me_irl it is allowed to use an emoji instead of the underscore _
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I'm sorry, i genuinely can't see it. Just for clarification I'm not simping/defending AI. It's just something that has genuinely baffled me since AI pictures started to surface. It was easier in the beginning to find anomalies to determine the origin of the picture, but nowadays those have disappeared as well.
The few examples i can recognize are of converted memes. I assume those are generated by ai, but thats just because i have the knowledge of the original version of those and guessing that not many would want to manually repaint those.
The link contains AI term, but this information should be excluded as it's not visible on a picture.
The color scheme is different as well, but at the same time people can use some specific art style with a different color scheme too.
Cant really find any anomalies either. I doubt that this is what you mean when trying to see the difference? Based on just the picture i can't tell.
Even human made pictures often have nothing discernable behind those, text or at least video is needed to say what's behind it.
Of course i can use imagination to add any story i want to a picture, but that would be just making stuff up and I'd always have the knowledge that it was made up and it could be done exactly the same way for both human and machine made pictures.
Though i do appreciate the attempt. Thank you, i guess i just miss something that helps most people see the difference.
No worries, it's more of a gut feeling than anything specific. I'm not really looking at the picture with a microscope. It's more, immediately when I see the overall image I'm like, that's A.I. I almost feel a twinge of sadness or disappointment when I see A.I. images now, like I'd rather there be no image at all lol
Fair, still thank you for explaining.
Though you're not the first person to refer to it as a sort of a gut feeling. There was some thread few weeks ago where someone posted a link to a simple test where there were 20 random pictures and had to detect which ones were AI which ones were real. Most people did say that it was similarly a gut feeling. That gives me an idea and a direction to search.
I just looked that up because it seemed interesting. It was a fun little game where you have to choose out of two images. It was a lot harder though because it was out of context and photorealistic. I find it much harder personally to identify photo realism A.I. unless it makes some glaring mistakes. Mostly it kind of looks "too perfect". I ended up with 80% accuracy. I actually got more accurate when I got bored and chose within 2 seconds to get it over with lol, I was less accurate when I carefully zoomed in and took my time which was an interesting outcome. The cynical part of me wonders if the results of that game will be used to make even more convincing A.I.
Link
That one is actually even better. The other one was in foreign language so i couldn't understand the explanations of why some pictures were AI.
Though it does have the same problem. There are only 2 options, so it's possible to get 50% right by just randomly choosing. I could probably guess 3/10 pictures because those had untypically blurry background, but eventually got 6/10 correct. Though the blurry effect can be achieved in photography as well. So it was just guessing and figuring out the pattern for those pictures.
Accuracy dropped to 45% if i continued.