OK. What are the clues?
Comment on Hands-on with ChatGPT's powerful new image engine
Chronographs@lemmy.zip 15 hours ago
Those examples are instantly recognizable as slop to me
Powderhorn@beehaw.org 13 hours ago
Chronographs@lemmy.zip 12 hours ago
Mostly the art and the fonts if I had to guess? It was more of an uncanny valley visceral reaction though.
Powderhorn@beehaw.org 11 hours ago
I’ve been out of the design game for six years at this point. Given that I did broadsheet design and wince at most everything for both art and typographical choices, it wasn’t really the sort of thing that stood out to me. There is a lot of bad design being happily gobbled up … hell, I didn’t look at rave flyers in the '90s and think “this is great design,” but rather “how the hell did they have the budget for C2S in CMYK with spot fluorescent and a top coat?”
Chronographs@lemmy.zip 11 hours ago
I didn’t say it was bad, per-say, I don’t know enough about design to judge that, it just immediately triggered the “this is ai” bell in my head when I looked at it.
Steve@communick.news 15 hours ago
It doesn’t count if you were told first.
Need to try again in double blind AB testing.
AcesFullOfKings@feddit.uk 10 hours ago
Steve@communick.news 9 hours ago
That’s asking which one someone likes more, not which they think is AI. It’s a subtle but important distinction. For me it was a tossup. I picked the AI 3 to 2.
In reality all the passages felt like over-written attempts to say something simple, as poetical as possible. I’ve never really liked that style of writing. I try to be much more direct.
But generally, yah. That’s what I mean. You need that kind of test to know if you can tell something is AI or not.