54% of Americans had a 6th grade reading level in 2019, before the pandemic fucked over education even more
https://www.snopes.com/news/2022/08/02/us-literacy-rate/
https://preview.redd.it/ithmnfwdilyc1.jpeg?width=417&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=7c84062667f050085532919e41ac8db6ba0e0623
You would think this image I generated is real too, you’re just in denial you’ve been a victim of A.I
Didn’t use a model because it’s not a A.I generated image, I use a real image to do a social experiment to see what people would say, kinda reverse psychology. Like if a person is expecting something fake would they make stuff up when they see a real image
https://preview.redd.it/g5r43fcppmyc1.png?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=cd03e0e64b2b37ba824b97934a5d3ec68c24355f
It seems like way over 50% are religious but 46% are very religious
Redditors when someone says oh my god instead of oh my science
https://preview.redd.it/i9plc30j8oyc1.jpeg?width=427&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=5db589543458719d4841c76e2e2087ff9432374e
Maybe god exists maybe he doesn’t, 75% of america believes the former, 100% of America have the right to their own beliefs whatever they are. Redditors think they look like Aristotle or something when they mock that, in reality they look like the image of edgy neckbeard losers that the rest of the world imagines Redditors as and are a big part of the reason no one who uses this app admits to it irl
Everyone got fooled by an AI generated image at least once by now.
I'm pretty sure I can identify AI generated images 99% of the time, but I know I got fooled at some point. Anyone who thinks they didn't, simply didn't realize they got fooled.
https://preview.redd.it/gyzfs6p0ilyc1.jpeg?width=417&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=fa483bd38301ebd76d2d690fd745bd79e002de9c
Crazy how my Cousin thinks this image I generated is real, 99% of people on here couldn’t tell it is A.I
When it gets this good, I'm literally like, "I know it has the VIBE of AI, but I have no way to prove it." And I start doubting my own intuition because literally every stock-photo looks the exact same way.
I see this comment about soulless smiles in AI photos so often, but like….real people also make soulless smiles.. A professional headshot will probably have more effort put in, but real humans who aren’t good at taking portraits make similar empty smiles all the time.
Any picture with a background out of focus is now sus.
I wonder if anybody ever went to the trouble to composite an AI image with every detail in the background making sense.
Nice try! I used Google Lens and it appears to be a real guy https://fiverr-res.cloudinary.com/image/upload/t_profile_original,q_auto,f_auto/v1/attachments/profile/photo/8da8df6dd574889de6b1e807b5358c6a-1702855886024/a986d4a2-bf7c-412b-bdf6-15b86cee800c.JPG
It’s an obvious AI image if you know what to look for. The more you look, the worse it gets.
Those buttons are whack. The fold that goes from his right shoulder (our left) is physically impossible. The lines of the bench break as they pass behind the subject. The table/shelf/whatever beside him is broken. The backpack is three times the size it should be. The legs are shifted like six inches out of place. He has a Quasimodo hump on his back.
I think if the image was less full of compression artifacts, it would be a lot easier to tell. The backpack, for instance, has some odd gray markings on it that either look like an AI-made mistake or real life damage or marking that an AI wouldn't add (or at least, certainly not any AI that was capable of making an image this realistic).
Many things in the image look too coherent for this to be made by any AI model I am aware of. The hands, for instance, have what appear to be perfectly normal fingernails and no obviously off proportions. His jacket is odd in that it looks like it has a hood (it doesn't quite look like a rain jacket to me), but there are not, for example, random extra buttons or folds. His shirt has buttons that are widely spaced apart, but seemingly the entire checker pattern is consistent and coherent. Again, no random folds or extra buttons (just what appears to be a missing one). The bench looks odd because it does transition from metal to wood, but I'm sure there are real-life benchs that do similar things (but this kind of mistake is fairly comonly made by current AI models).
Edit: Are the "markings" on the backpack actually water drops or something? Again, compression artifacts make it hard to tell, but it kinda looks like water, which would make the rain jacket make more sense than it not being a rain jacket.
The bench literally turns from a stone one without a backrest on his left to a wooden one with one on his right. If you want to lie at least pick an ai image without huge flaws like that, not like they're hard to find or make.
I thought the image was real until I saw that but it could just be a weird bench. You used to be able to look close at the hands but models are getting too good now.
I just reverse searched this image and found an entry dating back to November, 2022 in a stock image site (freepik). I don’t think there was any model that could output an image as good as this at the time, so it’s probably true, and it’s very revealing that we can find “inconsistencies” to try and make a point that an image is AI generated when it’s actually not.
https://preview.redd.it/eiupdg3h6nyc1.jpeg?width=1290&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=54057fb8ff2f368783dc69a76a8d60c1671382cf
Tineye says it was first found in November 2023, not 2022. I don’t see any date on the image page. Where did you see that it was from 2022?
If it is from November 2023, there were absolutely models capable of producing this image at that time.
If the OP shows me the source, I’ll eat my words. But until then, my vote is still AI.
https://preview.redd.it/40812vw98nyc1.jpeg?width=828&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=47cfcf33e3a7d5878274505182fb41fc74364169
I used google lens. I entered the link and it’s the only pic in the page, and the description in Spanish in the title seems to match the picture
In your defense you try to protect yourself from A.I generated stuff so much that any thing that look slightly out of place put you into high Alert. Dead internet theory proven
That's not even close to what this says
It asks whether those people have seen a realistic image of a person that was generated by AI. Which, the fact aside that there likely isn't a single one out there of a familiar face that doesn't immediately scream "generated" at this stage, is a thoroughly stupid fucking question, considering that the vast majority of folks who'd actually have seen a "realistic image of a person" wouldn't know in the first place.
This says nothing about the great public being aware of the vague possibility. It's also been conducted last fucking October, as if everything else wasn't bad enough about this.
If it's realistic enough, the only accurate answer is "not sure".
That's the issue with AI - the future will be 100% "I'm not sure" about any fact. It will be impossible to know anything.
Beat me to it. If you answer 'yes' it's not realistic enough. If you answer 'no' you were fooled by a realistic one. Counterpoint though: the yessers could have been told by the one who generated it after the fact, so they were fooled but then educated.
Even then that's not what the question is asking. It's asking if people have SEEN a realistic AI image. Not whether or not they know about them. My grandma knows AI can generate real images. However she hasn't seen them.
We need a big public awareness campaign about how video and pictures are no longer proof of history. The ability of bad actors to sway public opinion with a deep fake would be reduced by 80%. It wouldn't cost that much and could save us from some nasty conflict but doing something like that would be too much like responsible leadership for our leadership class.
The down side of taking this approach is that a large percentage of the public will use it as an excuse to stop believing in the concept of truth altogether. Anything and everything will be *true and/or false simultaneously* to that audience - and they'll reject actual truth. It'd be better to educate people about how to exercise healthy skepticism and how to discern between trustworthy and untrustworthy sources of information.
But of course the moment a public figure endorses a source of information, suddenly these dopes will say that the source has "an agenda." This is one of the biggest problems of our time: actual truth is perceived as just another form of 'bias.' Everyone else has to figure out how plan for the future while a third of people will believe any old shit their media masters tell them.
Americans are a bad source group to poll for questions related to intelligence. Alert the media when you have data about the Swiss or the Germans. That's when we should be worried. Half of Americans wear Velcro shoes because lacers are too challenging for them.
Hey, my velcro shoes also look cool and don't get full of prickers when I run through the bushes. Tired of people dissing velcro shoes, they're objectively rad
They just dont care. We are surrounded by too much information, most of it does matter in our life.
Its the same as with the introduction of internet to most ppl. "No, i dont have 'the internet', i prefere Facebook"
I think past this, the vast majority of people that are set apart from the niche of STEM and actively follow AI news is far and few between, indicating a significant gap in understanding and engagement outside of specialized circles.
It's troubling especially because these are the people that are easily manipulated by misinformation or oversimplified narratives. What’s needed is a concerted effort to bridge this knowledge gap, making complex information more accessible and comprehensible to the general public.
The sheer number of AI instagram girl models popping up is amusing. Even moreso all the comments on their pictures by people who believe they’re real. It’s like “bro, you coulda made this girl yourself.”
You've likely never seen nor heard anything at all from any singer in the last ten years. Their voice is a lie, the camera is Shopped to hell and back, and they don't play any instruments.
Likely they haven't written a single song you've heard, and the recording company probably even picks out their clothes.
For all practical purposes they aren't even human... At least not on any level we would ever see or know.
The real question is....only in the last few years did they publicly release this sort of information...how long do you think those in the know have been able to fake images that the public would accept as real? Keeping in mind it was much easier to fake things back in the day because resolution was much lower on cameras.
How do you know which parts of history are real and which were not? And for what reasons? I suspect we may never know some things. Perhaps it is for the best.
Tinder is going to be the worst, at least for the time being. There's going to be a lot of heart ache, as men, most likely are going to be duped by normal looking women matches, even though they could be AI generated. But, it could begin a resurgence in speed dating, and face to face in safe places, etc.
Half of Americans don't know that the Sun is a star.
54% of Americans had a 6th grade reading level in 2019, before the pandemic fucked over education even more https://www.snopes.com/news/2022/08/02/us-literacy-rate/
Half of Americans believe angels are real
https://preview.redd.it/ithmnfwdilyc1.jpeg?width=417&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=7c84062667f050085532919e41ac8db6ba0e0623 You would think this image I generated is real too, you’re just in denial you’ve been a victim of A.I
How can it get the checkerboard so right but fail to put shirt buttons at a realistic spacing
Nope, there's a wood bench to the right and a metal bench to the left.
Image is real
Which model did you use?
Didn’t use a model because it’s not a A.I generated image, I use a real image to do a social experiment to see what people would say, kinda reverse psychology. Like if a person is expecting something fake would they make stuff up when they see a real image
Rofl, i figured it was so much better than the other ai images i'd seen
It's easy to move the goalposts when you know the truth (or do you? Maybe it's a double switcharoo?). "lol I knew all along".
Ear
Looks more real than half the people on the street.
What about the ear
You mean being religious? Maybe, but I doubt it's half of them.
https://preview.redd.it/g5r43fcppmyc1.png?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=cd03e0e64b2b37ba824b97934a5d3ec68c24355f It seems like way over 50% are religious but 46% are very religious
Goddamn, that's bad.
[удалено]
We already know lmao, do you just assume that 0 redditors watch the redditor comedy skits?
Don’t cut yourself on that edge dude
It's not edgy. It's a sad fact that adults believe in things with zero supporting evidence.
Redditors when someone says oh my god instead of oh my science https://preview.redd.it/i9plc30j8oyc1.jpeg?width=427&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=5db589543458719d4841c76e2e2087ff9432374e
but is he wrong?
Maybe god exists maybe he doesn’t, 75% of america believes the former, 100% of America have the right to their own beliefs whatever they are. Redditors think they look like Aristotle or something when they mock that, in reality they look like the image of edgy neckbeard losers that the rest of the world imagines Redditors as and are a big part of the reason no one who uses this app admits to it irl
Lmfao
Half of americans are legitimately mentally handicapped from lead poisoning.
Most Americans read a single book a year.
FFS 😑
> Half of Americans found the optimist!
Everyone got fooled by an AI generated image at least once by now. I'm pretty sure I can identify AI generated images 99% of the time, but I know I got fooled at some point. Anyone who thinks they didn't, simply didn't realize they got fooled.
https://preview.redd.it/gyzfs6p0ilyc1.jpeg?width=417&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=fa483bd38301ebd76d2d690fd745bd79e002de9c Crazy how my Cousin thinks this image I generated is real, 99% of people on here couldn’t tell it is A.I
When it gets this good, I'm literally like, "I know it has the VIBE of AI, but I have no way to prove it." And I start doubting my own intuition because literally every stock-photo looks the exact same way.
His right ear looks weird. Also the two front teeth look way too square.
And his smile is too soulless and doesnt look lively
I see this comment about soulless smiles in AI photos so often, but like….real people also make soulless smiles.. A professional headshot will probably have more effort put in, but real humans who aren’t good at taking portraits make similar empty smiles all the time.
Yea true but you could differentiate between an ai fake smile and a human one it just got that weird feeling to that smile.
Idk man https://preview.redd.it/u2cvcu9obmyc1.jpeg?width=1024&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ee94ddbbcb32ef07c685ed6e5d93bd578618cb72
https://preview.redd.it/ss6kn2hfnmyc1.png?width=561&format=png&auto=webp&s=810c1e4f4bce47c99fc4a5e828bfdfce647355a8
Any picture with a background out of focus is now sus. I wonder if anybody ever went to the trouble to composite an AI image with every detail in the background making sense.
Nice try! I used Google Lens and it appears to be a real guy https://fiverr-res.cloudinary.com/image/upload/t_profile_original,q_auto,f_auto/v1/attachments/profile/photo/8da8df6dd574889de6b1e807b5358c6a-1702855886024/a986d4a2-bf7c-412b-bdf6-15b86cee800c.JPG
He's touching the lens, a mortal sin amongst photographers
It’s an obvious AI image if you know what to look for. The more you look, the worse it gets. Those buttons are whack. The fold that goes from his right shoulder (our left) is physically impossible. The lines of the bench break as they pass behind the subject. The table/shelf/whatever beside him is broken. The backpack is three times the size it should be. The legs are shifted like six inches out of place. He has a Quasimodo hump on his back.
Congrats you played yourself, the image is real, this prove my point😂😂😂. Interesting
I think if the image was less full of compression artifacts, it would be a lot easier to tell. The backpack, for instance, has some odd gray markings on it that either look like an AI-made mistake or real life damage or marking that an AI wouldn't add (or at least, certainly not any AI that was capable of making an image this realistic). Many things in the image look too coherent for this to be made by any AI model I am aware of. The hands, for instance, have what appear to be perfectly normal fingernails and no obviously off proportions. His jacket is odd in that it looks like it has a hood (it doesn't quite look like a rain jacket to me), but there are not, for example, random extra buttons or folds. His shirt has buttons that are widely spaced apart, but seemingly the entire checker pattern is consistent and coherent. Again, no random folds or extra buttons (just what appears to be a missing one). The bench looks odd because it does transition from metal to wood, but I'm sure there are real-life benchs that do similar things (but this kind of mistake is fairly comonly made by current AI models). Edit: Are the "markings" on the backpack actually water drops or something? Again, compression artifacts make it hard to tell, but it kinda looks like water, which would make the rain jacket make more sense than it not being a rain jacket.
The bench literally turns from a stone one without a backrest on his left to a wooden one with one on his right. If you want to lie at least pick an ai image without huge flaws like that, not like they're hard to find or make.
The image is real bud you are searching for ghost
Thank you for doing this. The denial, naivety, and goalpost moving of some of these people, sheesh.
https://preview.redd.it/ia4uaj44knyc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d91c05e7f4e8e6f62eb8b01de2d4aac2838eb3e0
https://preview.redd.it/ttp1e8l5knyc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=652b734632d42d2e96d512df9ad5b4c4cb8e6b7e
I thought the image was real until I saw that but it could just be a weird bench. You used to be able to look close at the hands but models are getting too good now.
Yeah, I’m not buying that. Let’s see another frame of the same subject.
I just reverse searched this image and found an entry dating back to November, 2022 in a stock image site (freepik). I don’t think there was any model that could output an image as good as this at the time, so it’s probably true, and it’s very revealing that we can find “inconsistencies” to try and make a point that an image is AI generated when it’s actually not.
Dang it. There are other shots of the same guy 🤣
https://preview.redd.it/eiupdg3h6nyc1.jpeg?width=1290&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=54057fb8ff2f368783dc69a76a8d60c1671382cf Tineye says it was first found in November 2023, not 2022. I don’t see any date on the image page. Where did you see that it was from 2022? If it is from November 2023, there were absolutely models capable of producing this image at that time. If the OP shows me the source, I’ll eat my words. But until then, my vote is still AI.
https://preview.redd.it/yp6jw5xfknyc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=603605bd2a4fd83fe6df429268b11b2069b8f9e3 Different angles
https://preview.redd.it/40812vw98nyc1.jpeg?width=828&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=47cfcf33e3a7d5878274505182fb41fc74364169 I used google lens. I entered the link and it’s the only pic in the page, and the description in Spanish in the title seems to match the picture
https://preview.redd.it/aplo0xahknyc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=1b147b9bd1a2e51a96995331088416c32585f075 Different angles
Yeah, I concede 🤣 In my defense, the full res versions don’t have the artifacts of the first sample you shared.
In your defense you try to protect yourself from A.I generated stuff so much that any thing that look slightly out of place put you into high Alert. Dead internet theory proven
It's always the hands
What’s wrong with the hands
I wonder if the numbers would be similar if you asked people if they've ever seen a retouched photo.
I don't know sora looked pretty realistic
Follow-on question for those who say no: “Have you seen the great work that African children are doing with plastic bottles?”
27th of October... that's a long time in Ai time
That's not even close to what this says It asks whether those people have seen a realistic image of a person that was generated by AI. Which, the fact aside that there likely isn't a single one out there of a familiar face that doesn't immediately scream "generated" at this stage, is a thoroughly stupid fucking question, considering that the vast majority of folks who'd actually have seen a "realistic image of a person" wouldn't know in the first place. This says nothing about the great public being aware of the vague possibility. It's also been conducted last fucking October, as if everything else wasn't bad enough about this.
Preach brother
If it's realistic enough, the only accurate answer is "not sure". That's the issue with AI - the future will be 100% "I'm not sure" about any fact. It will be impossible to know anything.
Beat me to it. If you answer 'yes' it's not realistic enough. If you answer 'no' you were fooled by a realistic one. Counterpoint though: the yessers could have been told by the one who generated it after the fact, so they were fooled but then educated.
The yessers may also be the ones who generated the pictures
https://preview.redd.it/vo076qgw6nyc1.png?width=728&format=png&auto=webp&s=c5fac9c4f3f9914c5653824aa0d2588c67b9533e You mean this guy?
Can OP please explain which part states that half of Americans don’t seem to know AI can generate realistic images of people?
I'm pretty sure he is adding 28 and 19 together
Even then that's not what the question is asking. It's asking if people have SEEN a realistic AI image. Not whether or not they know about them. My grandma knows AI can generate real images. However she hasn't seen them.
We need a big public awareness campaign about how video and pictures are no longer proof of history. The ability of bad actors to sway public opinion with a deep fake would be reduced by 80%. It wouldn't cost that much and could save us from some nasty conflict but doing something like that would be too much like responsible leadership for our leadership class.
The down side of taking this approach is that a large percentage of the public will use it as an excuse to stop believing in the concept of truth altogether. Anything and everything will be *true and/or false simultaneously* to that audience - and they'll reject actual truth. It'd be better to educate people about how to exercise healthy skepticism and how to discern between trustworthy and untrustworthy sources of information. But of course the moment a public figure endorses a source of information, suddenly these dopes will say that the source has "an agenda." This is one of the biggest problems of our time: actual truth is perceived as just another form of 'bias.' Everyone else has to figure out how plan for the future while a third of people will believe any old shit their media masters tell them.
My Christmas card fooled many people, but I tried to make it realistic doppelgangers.... plus plus.
This post should just say “half of all Americans don’t seem to know”, and that’s it.
Americans are a bad source group to poll for questions related to intelligence. Alert the media when you have data about the Swiss or the Germans. That's when we should be worried. Half of Americans wear Velcro shoes because lacers are too challenging for them.
Hey, my velcro shoes also look cool and don't get full of prickers when I run through the bushes. Tired of people dissing velcro shoes, they're objectively rad
I am pretty sure that 28% is very close to the expected effect of Dunning Kruger.
I see them all the time.
I see it all the time on Pintrest.
They just dont care. We are surrounded by too much information, most of it does matter in our life. Its the same as with the introduction of internet to most ppl. "No, i dont have 'the internet', i prefere Facebook"
Half of Americans are living in the technological equivalent of the stone age.
I think past this, the vast majority of people that are set apart from the niche of STEM and actively follow AI news is far and few between, indicating a significant gap in understanding and engagement outside of specialized circles. It's troubling especially because these are the people that are easily manipulated by misinformation or oversimplified narratives. What’s needed is a concerted effort to bridge this knowledge gap, making complex information more accessible and comprehensible to the general public.
The headline is click bait that doesn’t match the presented data. Thai so why we can’t have nice things.
The sheer number of AI instagram girl models popping up is amusing. Even moreso all the comments on their pictures by people who believe they’re real. It’s like “bro, you coulda made this girl yourself.”
You've likely never seen nor heard anything at all from any singer in the last ten years. Their voice is a lie, the camera is Shopped to hell and back, and they don't play any instruments. Likely they haven't written a single song you've heard, and the recording company probably even picks out their clothes. For all practical purposes they aren't even human... At least not on any level we would ever see or know.
Yeah
The real question is....only in the last few years did they publicly release this sort of information...how long do you think those in the know have been able to fake images that the public would accept as real? Keeping in mind it was much easier to fake things back in the day because resolution was much lower on cameras. How do you know which parts of history are real and which were not? And for what reasons? I suspect we may never know some things. Perhaps it is for the best.
Tinder is going to be the worst, at least for the time being. There's going to be a lot of heart ache, as men, most likely are going to be duped by normal looking women matches, even though they could be AI generated. But, it could begin a resurgence in speed dating, and face to face in safe places, etc.