NewNewAugustEast@lemmy.zip 17 hours ago
I don’t think its AI, I think its cheaply reproduced and done over and over again.
If it was AI, I don’t think I would care, for this use case it doesn’t matter.
Here is one of the original, they are available everywhere:
I agree with the other poster, seems like someone took the original, probably changed the language, eventually changed it back and did OCR. Or some nonsense like that. You can find them online in all sorts of various states of degredation.
It’s not the same. Likely this is the very image that was fed into the AI, and the printed result sold online.
AI and OCR have converged, though in most general purpose models it’s not very good.
This pattern is now a very common copyright avoidance tactic used to produce low quality goods.
It’s not the same. Likely this is the very image that was fed into the AI, and the printed result sold online.
Given that these sell online, all over the place already, what would be the point? I doubt there is copyright, so it seems strange.
Then again what would be the point of OCR either. Back in the day we had generational degradation from copying over and over again, but this does look different.
Either way: meh. AI or not. Its throw away clipart.
Fair enough, in which case, it could be unintentional, the result of using a generative model to “upscale” it for printing, rather than a deterministic upscaler
DandomRude@piefed.social 16 hours ago
Yes, that could be the case. My guess was that templates like this were collected by image-generation models, which then turn them into complete nonsense on demand. But OCR could also be a good explanation, of course.