ThefuzzyFurryComrade@pawb.socialM to Fuck AI@lemmy.world · 8 days ago"Support Human Artists" (Art by Kxddybu)pawb.socialimagemessage-square4linkfedilinkarrow-up1140arrow-down14file-text
arrow-up1136arrow-down1image"Support Human Artists" (Art by Kxddybu)pawb.socialThefuzzyFurryComrade@pawb.socialM to Fuck AI@lemmy.world · 8 days agomessage-square4linkfedilinkfile-text
minus-squarelnxtx (xe/xem/xyr)@feddit.nllinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up4arrow-down7·8 days agoIt sucks: https://aiimagedetector.org/ Human (63.92) AI (36.08) https://sightengine.com/detect-ai-generated-images Not likely to be AI-generated or Deepfake 2% https://isgen.ai/ai-image-detector 100% AI This media is likely to be AI generated App/Device Used Diffusion Model
minus-squareZILtoid1991@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up9·8 days agoAI detectors are either unreliable due to them still using machine learning (ironcally), or at the very worst, just an RNG using the hash of the image as its seed value.
minus-squarego $fsck yourself@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up8·8 days agoIf only OP had linked the original post from the artist, whose name is also in the image.
minus-squareCarrotsHaveEars@lemmy.mllinkfedilinkarrow-up6·8 days agohttps://wasitai.com/ “Looks like this image does not contain parts created by AI.” It’s still one level under pure human rating. Just ignore these"detectors".
It sucks:
https://aiimagedetector.org/
https://sightengine.com/detect-ai-generated-images
https://isgen.ai/ai-image-detector
AI detectors are either unreliable due to them still using machine learning (ironcally), or at the very worst, just an RNG using the hash of the image as its seed value.
If only OP had linked the original post from the artist, whose name is also in the image.
https://wasitai.com/
“Looks like this image does not contain parts created by AI.”
It’s still one level under pure human rating.
Just ignore these"detectors".