Another thing that AI is ruining: a trusting nature. I’ve caught myself hesitating before I boost a superb photo that’s not obviously AI-generated but may be too good to be true. I check the AltText for signs of individuality like ‘I’ or ‘our local park’ or a random aside. I like fingertips at photo edges. I like typos and garbled grammar and messy phrasing. These are now my Captchas, a human fingerprint pressed into words or photos like a wax seal that verifies: this is from a real person.
@CiaraNi Alas, I‘ve heard that some people include intentional misspellings in AI-generated text just in case readers delvve into analysing it along the lines you mention. I shouldn’t wonder if added ‘features’ will be added to images as well.
@JohnDA That thought had struck me, that 'fake flaws to signal fake humanity' would be next. Depressing to learn that I wasn't just being pessimistic but that it's actually happening.
It seems to currently be people trying to hide the fact that they used AI by manually inserting mistakes, but I suppose it won't be long before it's a built-in feature so you can save the extra step by getting AI to generate content with 'fake human errors' in the first place.
@RalphBassfeld Oh yes. If there isn't, there soon will be, I'm sure. 'Fake human fake-errors.' It's like an Arms Race between us and the machines. (Or rather: their programmers and the companies behind them.) We find ways to avoid or reveal or stop them, so they find new ways to do things we want to stop or avoid or reveal.
@CiaraNi if you haven't, read Filterworld by Kyle Chayka. He has en example of how recommender algos is shaping the mainstream on SoMe, and that turns into the example of people adopting jokes as if it was their own kids or friends doing it. Simple way to game SoMe to get likes etc. It's... Depressing...
@theappletree I've caught myself doing it enough times recently to notice that I'm doing it, if you know what I mean. I unfollowed someone recently because they have 'discovered' generative AI and now constantly post AI-generated 'photos' with Alt Text 'descriptions' a la 'Mountains with snow at sunset'. Their toots used to be personal and interesting, now just energy-eating AI rubbish. It is depressing, all of it.
@CiaraNi Which will work until that also gets mimicked. I think we're going to have to fall back on personal relationships and reputation. I dunno that this Web of strangers can survive.
@CiaraNi you should be wary of adopting such a simplistic binary approach.
Using Generative AI to produce alt text has a huge take up & use among the disabled, blind, and visually impaired community.
If you browse the right hashtags you’ll find it’s a huge transformative benefit for them.
The tools are neutral, it’s the (bad faith) actors that should be verified & if necessary blocked.
@StuartGray I didn't adopt anything. It's an instinctive reaction I've tools are neutral objects used by humans. I know the accessiblity benefits.
@holly @juliette It's such an unfortunate and depressing side-effect of it all. In situations like that, I instinctively react positively to image descriptions that mention something individual, like a local placename or 'on our holiday last year' or whatever. But it's a shame our faith has been shaken in the first place.
@lykso Agreed, it is probably only a matter of time before 'fake human fake-errors' are an embedded feature of #AI, if they aren't already. And agreed that personal relationships matter more and more. It's been that way for a while, people seeking explicitly personal-experience recommendations for recipes, products, restaurants etc. We're tired of poor and gamed search results. The personal touch is even more relevant now because of all the #AI slop.
@CiaraNi Spectacular scenes created entirely in Photoshop have existed for decades, sometimes even winning prizes.
@mansr Entirely fake photos of fake places and things that the person presents as if they were their personal human-taken photos of real places and things aren't the same as manually edited real photos. Until recently, few had access to any photo-editing tools. Photoshop is an expensive professional tool with complex functionality. This isn't the same as mass posting of entirely fake images that are at anyone's fingertips in an AI-instant that they pretend are photos they took personally.
@CiaraNi Until recently, only those skilled in the use of Photoshop (or equivalent software) were able to construct fake scenes using elements lifted from other photos. Now everybody can do it. The problem isn't new, but the scale of it has grown.
Perhaps an upside of this is that people will become more wary of what they see, making it harder to use fake/edited photos for nefarious purposes.
@NatureMC It is the flood of it that has changed everything - the scale of it, the fact that it is at everyone's fingertips, no skill required, that basic search and social media use is drowning in it.
@reynir That's a great example of a situation where there is a nagging doubt now but we wouldn't have doubted before. And where, for the moment at least, a random comment or hesitation is a nice sign that we're communicating with a real person.
@tantramar @NatureMC As you both say: the environmental cost is gaspingly high and the distribution cost is low and the effort/labour cost is zero - a perfect storm for something that, in many applications, just makes life worse for real people using tools and services in real life.
Is there a polite way to ask if an amazing photo is real or AI? I just refrained from boosting a fab photo because it seems borderline. I chose caution because the AltText is generic with no placename. But I'm not certain. It may be real.
I hate the way #AI has enshittified this too, making me suspicious of simple things. Making me perhaps unfairly think someone posts fake images when they may just be a good photographer. Making me feel I must do homework and research before sharing a photo.
@CiaraNi funny you asked, fist I saw your fantastic Alt texts I thought they were AI generated, because of the level of details.
@boab That's interesting! I write too-long #AltText because I write them as if I were describing the scene off-the-cuff to a blind friend standing beside me, so I ramble and make asides, like I do in conversation. It never struck me that lots of detail could seem AI-generated, but I can see how.
Funnily enough, I suspect AI in the opposite case, when AltText has little detail with no placename or personal touch, just 'sunrise at frozen lake'. Bloody AI makes us suspicious in every direction!
@kel I wish there were a tag, and also a social expectation that the tag would be used, making it clear every time if an image is human or AI. And at the same time, I am depressed that we need to wish for this.
In the current example today where I didn't boost the image, I wished there was a polite way to ask the person (a non-mutual) if it was their own photo.
@CiaraNi let me just say I like your alt text a lot. And yes, place names is a (human) tell. And so far I have seen this, or humor in all of your texts.
I see the level of details as something that takes a lot of work, and something that makes sense to have automated
@CiaraNi If I may offer a slightly different perspective, AI gives me a chance to use pictures to communicate my meaning. Words are sometimes hard for me and I find having some pictures on hand to let others in my life know what’s going on with me. I draw many of these pictures with AI.
@CiaraNi I don't think there is. I tend to say something like "Thanks Midjourney!" and see what comes back. If not sure... I don't engage.
But yeah. It's not possible to trust anything...
@Lizette603_23 Edited photos are fine, if that's what we mean by 'tampered with'. It's fake images made by energy-sucking AI-machines, but presented as if they were the person's own real photo of a real place, that I won't boost.
@CiaraNi Not sure but the simplest approach could be to compliment the photographer and ask what their workflow was?
Bear in mind it’s *very* rare to see any photo that hasn’t undergone some degree of post processing, even if that’s just sharpening or colour correction, and like any art form more “artistic” images can involve more processing or refinement - few pro photographers publish raw photos only.
@changeling I was thinking about images that someone gets an AI machine to generate, then passes them off online as if they were real photos of real places that they took themselves, not fake images of non-existent places.
@StuartGray I didn't mention editing. Photos were processed even back in darkroom-days and, assuming it's not falsifying facts in the scene, editing doesn't alter the fact that a photo is a real photo of a real place. It's fake images made by energy-sucking AI, but presented as if they were the person's own photo of a real place, that I want to avoid boosting.
Complimenting could be a polite way to test the waters, right enough. (Albeit tiresome that it's necessary.) Thanks for the suggestion.
@WeirdWriter Great insights. Thanks for sharing.
Being able to spot AI has become a valuable skill. As AI machines develop, it's getting harder to spot some of the signs in some cases. For me, at any rate.
@allenstenhaus ‘but please don't take typos and grammar errors as proof of humanity’ Oh I don’t. As discussed in the thread (I know Mastodon doesn’t show all replies), if fake errors aren’t already common in AI, then they soon will be. 'Fake human fake-errors.' We spot new ways to identify AI-generated content; the people designing AI find new ways to make it harder to identify AI content.
"My former healthy skepticism is morphing into a blend of nihilism and distrust' This resonates! Well put.
@wolfnowl The #NotAI hashtag seems like a useful way forward. I like your idea too that we just ask! I have wanted to once or twice, but refrained because reactions may vary.
Agreed that stealing people's work to train AI is a separate issue in itself. As is AI art that is clearly identified as AI art - I don't think of that as part of the 'fake AI photo' trend where someone posts a 'photo' as if it were a real photo of a real place that they took themselves, but it's entirely AI-generated.
If you get a negative response to a simple question, remember this: "I can't control the other person's behavior, but I can control my response. Their actions may be rude or unacceptable, but I still want my response to be measured and thoughtful. Even if they aren't doing what is right, I still want to make sure I'm doing what is right." ~ James Clear
🙂
@wolfnowl That's a good way to deal with negative responses generally. In the specific circumstance of online interactions, I prefer to ignore or quickly close negative responses. With age, I realised I don't have to spend labour or time crafting responses (measured or otherwise :-)) to bad-faith interactions from strangers. I suspect asking 'where was the photo taken?' may provoke a bad response from someone who had indeed posted an AI fake and knew ´why I was asking, so I just skip past.
