Source (Via Xcancel)
An AI generated contest.. thats the most low effort contest ever. Glad this person did what they did and used real skill.
this post was submitted on 19 Apr 2025
1101 points (98.4% liked)
Fuck AI
3193 readers
591 users here now
"We did it, Patrick! We made a technological breakthrough!"
A place for all those who loathe AI to discuss things, post articles, and ridicule the AI hype. Proud supporter of working people. And proud booer of SXSW 2024.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Like a book recommendation contest
even a book recommendation contest could only be this dumb if the only way to participate was to shout out random words and hope it would coincide with a good book title
Concur. I would actually like a book rec event
I highly recommend Schachnovelle by Stefan Zweig
What a stupid fucking idea for a contest. "Press a button until something interesting pops out. Best button pusher wins." Glad it got subverted like that.
load more comments
(1 replies)
It’s the opposite of the OP’s headline.
Aimbot works because being good at games is essentially bending your skills to match a simulation, aimbot can have the simulation parameters written into it.
LLMs are blenders for human-made content with zero understanding of why some art resonates and other art doesn’t. A human with decent skill will always outperform a LLM because the human knows what the ineffable qualities are that make a piece of art resonate.
100% yes but just because I really hate how everyone conflates AI with LLMs these days I have to say this: The LLM isn't generating the image, it's at most generating a prompt for an image generating AI (which you could also write yourself)
Haha, humans taking over AI jobs!
Somehow they invented a contest that’s more boring than watching paint dry.
The analogy sucks because it implies AI is in any way beneficial.
Yeah it's a bad analogy because aimbots actually get good results.
But they also suck out the joy and soul of games, so it's pretty apt.
load more comments
(5 replies)
I'm shocked i haven't seen captchas of the form "choose which image is AI generated"
People who use Lemmy would be able to tell the difference most of the time, but the average person would have zero idea.
Just look at any of the YouTube videos with obviously AI generated clickbait thumbnails that get 10s of millions of views. Or all of the shitty obvious Photoshop thumbnails that existed before AI.
No, nope they wouldn't. Generally speaking when I explain why something posted here is AI, I get upvoted, when I explain why something is unlikely to be AI, I get at best controversial votes, while next to me a post with the equivalent of "I can tell by the pixels" is getting upvoted. It's very rare for someone to chime in and actually discuss the case in an exploratory manner.
There's already plenty of drama within the artist community over false AI allegations. Accusations from people who should know better than accuse someone of using AI because "the shading is too good while the hands are too bad". Why the hell would lemmy be better at this than artist twitter.
Here's a quick intro on how to spot AI art, and, crucially, how not to.
Friend, I am talking about pictures that look like this:
Which was sent to me by someone, along with a bunch of other similar images, by someone who thought it was a real photo.
I am talking about thumbnails generated by early DALL-E, where people's faces are melting.
load more comments
(4 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
You cheated. Of course if you're an artist, you're going to make better art than AI.
it's like... yeah you can tweak every single parameter and build your own checkpoints and stack hundreds of extra networks on top of one another and that is certainly a skill, but creating art with intent is an entirely different skill. and the first one won't give you shit if the contest is about creating art with intent.
But is the outcome important part, or which skill was required to make it
He's a modern day John Henry.
What front end is this? Looks gorgeous
Is it not mono? It looks like mono.
Edit: oh I'm sleep deprived, I thought you said font.
I appreciate the enthusiasm
Nitter
load more comments
(1 replies)
Im pretty sure that's called cheating.
If you listen to the AI preachers at their pulpits, AI gen works the same way that people making art does, so how could it be cheating if they're the same thing?
load more comments
(1 replies)
view more: next ›