Fuck AI

yea, just because you prompt "noAI" doesn't mean it won't be sneaking into your results. I've even found shitty AI generated articles like from geekstogeeks sneaking inside marginalia search. which is just a query database of websites, no recommendation algorithm.

Search engines have gone to shit, your only path for reliable information is wikipedia.

Just go to a source and search there directly instead of using a search engine. AI has made search engines annoying as fuck lately. Wikipedia

Fucking hell first row last one 🫠

Presumably DDG's detection has a hard time keeping up with AI development. You can report AI generated images via the three dot menu so that's... something.

That's because there's no simple way to scan billions of images to determine their provenance.

Even glancing at your screenshot what's to say a lot of those aren't older artistic digital images?

This can be a fun learning example for you and the kid both. Download some massive packs of images online. Millions. Lump all of them into one single folder. Now sort them for common features, which were made with cameras, which were made digitally by a person, which are AI, etc.

Don't know how they do it, but it is definitely worth your time to mass report these images. Maybe take about 10 minutes and just repirt at many as you can. That's what I do. Probably doesn't do much, but if enough images are flagged, I'd hope they take a look at the website and rule whether to block that site completely. It's what I would do if I were them.

Edit:

Saw in a reply that you have reported them. I personally think we should strive to create a society where genAI is consistently mass reported as what it is. And that starts with people like us.

DuckDuckGo did a site-wide poll about 6 months ago asking their users if they wanted AI or not. It was on their homepage. 90% answered "no".

What did they do in response? ... nothing. It didn't fit their preconceived notions and apparent agenda, so they've just completely ignored it. The customer is always right, except when they don't want AI, then they're just wrong.

Yeah sadly the No AI filter isn't 100% accurate, it does try though and is better than no filter IMO

Apparently, the "hide AI" only blocks some domains that are known to be generators of the images. I did a "waterbear" search and noticed that a number of the slop is on stock.adobe and storage.googleapis, which immediately makes them "clear" for the search

I still hate DDG for leaving the "show ai: yes" as the fucking default. Fuck them

I was doing some arts and crafta with the girls, and i decided to use my photo printer to print them out some puctures of animals, wince they love animals. One of them said i want a funny bunny. So i searched for funny bunny. Holy shit, the result has absolutely disgusting to look at. Just animals were okay, but all it spat out was some boomer ass ai slop of "animals" i hate what the internet has become.

Labels should actually mean something.

It probably only filters for the machine readable markings that will be required in the EU starting next month.

But as soon as someone crops it in Photoshop it is indistinguishable from digital art made by humans

I constantly search images and I can't find anything that consistently blocks AI. I've had better luck finding images through Yandex. Even regular web searches are garbage anymore.

I did try Kagi, but despite the raving from people I felt the improvement wasn't much.

Would love suggestions. I like privacy, but if I can't find shit, it's meaningless.

Good job Adobe (upper right corner) for selling that super scientifically correct stock photo

I'm suspicious of the whole "noai" thing, especially when it is championed by companies with presence in AI. What wouldn't these companies just capture the noai search revenue to overshadow alternatives, continue to invest all their profits into AI, then kill noai and go full AI when the ideologically pure alternatives have fallen?

https://github.com/laylavish/uBlockOrigin-HUGE-AI-Blocklist

Recently did an image search on regular DDG, no AI filter, and was astonished by how much AI slop I got. Like, at least half the results were slop. The filter isn't great, but it's better than nothing.

For legit and usable (CC licensed) images, I stick with Wikimedia Commons. Haven't seen any horrors yet.

In this case, you’re seeing “artistic interpretations” based on tardigrades? They do this with exoplanets too.

I'm not sure I understand, are you thinking they are all AI? At least some of them are not - I recognize them from the before times. Tardigrade images have always been goofy looking.

The adobe stock images are AI though. It's probably a safe bet to avoid stock image sites although Alamy seems to have some good ones. Adding the photography filter helps a bit too, but I still got some stock images used on other websites.