If it’s comic style it’s really obvious, at least to me. A good rule of thumb: if the background isn’t pure white and there’s no signature or anything indicating an author, it’s probably AI slop, especially if it’s a clean image.
I mean, I can’t draw trees that well, so anything I made would use the same process as AI: look on the web for images of a forest, steal it, superimpose words on it. It just wouldn’t burn several kilowatts of energy if I did it.
This is not a defense of AI; I’m just saying. I can see why someone might take that route.
If you did it by hand you could at least credit the original artist that you took the picture from for your txt background. With Ai the theft is impersonal slop.
Looks like AI slop.
I could tell from the thumbnail by the yellow background alone.
Scarily, I’ve stopped being able to tell most of the time. It used to be real easy.
Granted, I’m not consciously looking for it, and I’m naturally trusting / semj-gullable so I don’t instinctively look for it either.
If it’s comic style it’s really obvious, at least to me. A good rule of thumb: if the background isn’t pure white and there’s no signature or anything indicating an author, it’s probably AI slop, especially if it’s a clean image.
Hence why I ask. Seems to really trigger the slop Peddlers.
This one is especially baffling. It would take longer to get AI to make this than it would take to do by hand, let alone digitally.
I mean, I can’t draw trees that well, so anything I made would use the same process as AI: look on the web for images of a forest, steal it, superimpose words on it. It just wouldn’t burn several kilowatts of energy if I did it.
This is not a defense of AI; I’m just saying. I can see why someone might take that route.
If you did it by hand you could at least credit the original artist that you took the picture from for your txt background. With Ai the theft is impersonal slop.
Why are you so obsessed with that lol.
Nice. Love that.