Recent searches
Search options
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.
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.
@CiaraNi btw let me know if that was unpolite ;)
@boab Oh no, not at all impolite! It's a fine observation, and very interesting to me because I was oblivious to that angle. It is good to know. Tak 
@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!
@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
@boab Thank you!
- Alt-texts which lately keep reaching exactly 1,500 characters or only few characters short of that limit.
- Alt-texts that also mention an even longer image description in the post. And there is an even longer image description in the post. Who asks an AI to describe an image in lots of details and then again in even more details?
- No AI can produce image descriptions with five-digit character counts like the long one in the post.
- Excessive detail information about an absolutely obscure niche topic in the long description.
- Description of visual details that aren't visible at the image's resolution.
- Transcripts of text that isn't legible or not even visible at the image's resolution.
- Sometimes I run an extra thread with an image-describing log.
#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #AltText #AltTextMeta #CWAltTextMeta #ImageDescription #ImageDescriptions #ImageDescriptionMeta #CWImageDescriptionMeta
@jupiter_rowland That's great commitment to AltTexting!
The only thing I'm reconsidering myself currently is whether to keep these monster descriptions in the post or put them into external documents and link to them.
#Long #LongPost #CWLong #CWLongPost #ImageDescription #ImageDescriptions #ImageDescriptionMeta #CWImageDescriptionMeta
@jupiter_rowland 60,000 characters is certainly commitment!
@katzenberger That could be a good way to do it - thanks for the suggestion.
Show me one AI that does that.
#ImageDescription #ImageDescriptions #ImageDescriptionMeta #CWImageDescriptionMeta
@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.
@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.
@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...
@vincent354 'Thanks Midjourney!' :-)
@CiaraNi You are welcome, but actually my name is Claude :p
@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.
@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.
@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.