I’ll be honest, the real pictures would fool me. The era where you could tell by the number of fingers or toes is gone, apparently. She does seem to change military branches a bit too often to be realistic. And, her colleagues seem a bit too unbothered by someone taking a picture of her with her shoes and socks off and feet up on a desk in an apparent military setting. But there aren’t any pictures I glance at and think “oh, that’s obviously AI”.
My only immediate reaction would be “The fuck is that badge thing” followed by “why is the car British and why are there plate carriers strapped to the seats”. But otherwise I would initially think it’s just low quality slop, especially after the IDF thirst trap propaganda trend.
I don’t know what modern military wear is. The badge thing seems strange, but I don’t know if it’s wrong. I can imagine putting plate carriers on the seats to dry them out if it has been hot and sweaty, but I don’t know if that’s actually common. As for the car, I would guess there are places where they might use what’s available locally, and who knows what that would be.
You have to admit that it’s at least high-quality slop. No extra hands, no extra toes or fingers. No text that is obviously slop.
High quality? Yes. Good under scrutiny? Absolutely fucking not.
Just to further my the points I made. The badge is stupid and indistinct also why the fuck would they be wearing it in fatigues. The plate carriers are strapped to the seats in a way I’m not even sure would be possible for their size. And the car is a fucking mess of random design elements and even eras, this one is hard to put into words but the interior has bits taken from GM cars, Land Rovers, and even some Toyota elements, also the vents are all fucked.
Point is that you can easily rip this image apart if you just look for things that just don’t make sense. Hell the plate carriers alone being strapped that tightly to the seats are fucking weird.
if you just look for things that just don’t make sense.
Do we have to do that with every image we see now? I would bet that a real image also has a lot of things that don’t make sense. I feel sorry for people who genuinely have 6 fingers. It’s rare, but it happens.
No not really, most of the AI slop out there is still obviously flawed in some ways that are obvious. Liquids, consistent backgrounds, and general weirdness can all be solid signs but none of these things are individually signs of AI. Honestly the best way to pick it out isn’t any individual but of weirdness but compounding weirdness, this image for example has the plate carriers, no door handle on the car, the interior having multiple manufacturers design elements, the stupid badge, and that I can’t define what’s going on in the background. Any one of these could just be weird but together is a general tell tale of AI.
Yes exactly. At least for now, use the AI for things you are not expert at.
I suck at graphic design so I get nanobanana to do that for me.
For simple bugs or creating testcases or easy to describe new features, Codex does it because it does a good job 85%+ of the time saving me a lot.
For really complex race conditions or vast complex enterprise applications… I’m literally an expert at debugging, a minority of human practitioners are better than me. Ofc I do that myself.
Whilst I’ve not used those tools, I’ve used their competitors and they constantly hallucinate methods, parameters, and write pointless unit tests (as in mock a return value and then test for that return value).
It has 3 tiddies lol
FACT CHECK:
Un-shocking tldr: X account is spreading misinfo
Source article: https://www.msn.com/en-us/technology/artificial-intelligence/maga-men-swindled-by-ai-model/ar-AA1Yvein
Original picture (note the human number of mammaries):
I’ll be honest, the real pictures would fool me. The era where you could tell by the number of fingers or toes is gone, apparently. She does seem to change military branches a bit too often to be realistic. And, her colleagues seem a bit too unbothered by someone taking a picture of her with her shoes and socks off and feet up on a desk in an apparent military setting. But there aren’t any pictures I glance at and think “oh, that’s obviously AI”.
My only immediate reaction would be “The fuck is that badge thing” followed by “why is the car British and why are there plate carriers strapped to the seats”. But otherwise I would initially think it’s just low quality slop, especially after the IDF thirst trap propaganda trend.
I don’t know what modern military wear is. The badge thing seems strange, but I don’t know if it’s wrong. I can imagine putting plate carriers on the seats to dry them out if it has been hot and sweaty, but I don’t know if that’s actually common. As for the car, I would guess there are places where they might use what’s available locally, and who knows what that would be.
You have to admit that it’s at least high-quality slop. No extra hands, no extra toes or fingers. No text that is obviously slop.
High quality? Yes. Good under scrutiny? Absolutely fucking not.
Just to further my the points I made. The badge is stupid and indistinct also why the fuck would they be wearing it in fatigues. The plate carriers are strapped to the seats in a way I’m not even sure would be possible for their size. And the car is a fucking mess of random design elements and even eras, this one is hard to put into words but the interior has bits taken from GM cars, Land Rovers, and even some Toyota elements, also the vents are all fucked.
Point is that you can easily rip this image apart if you just look for things that just don’t make sense. Hell the plate carriers alone being strapped that tightly to the seats are fucking weird.
Do we have to do that with every image we see now? I would bet that a real image also has a lot of things that don’t make sense. I feel sorry for people who genuinely have 6 fingers. It’s rare, but it happens.
No not really, most of the AI slop out there is still obviously flawed in some ways that are obvious. Liquids, consistent backgrounds, and general weirdness can all be solid signs but none of these things are individually signs of AI. Honestly the best way to pick it out isn’t any individual but of weirdness but compounding weirdness, this image for example has the plate carriers, no door handle on the car, the interior having multiple manufacturers design elements, the stupid badge, and that I can’t define what’s going on in the background. Any one of these could just be weird but together is a general tell tale of AI.
Reminds me of people who proclaim AI can’t code for shit.
I wonder if they’ve used Claude or Codex in the last ~3 months.
Amazon Holds Mandatory Meeting After Vibe-Code Triggered Major Outages
~ Mar 11, 2026
Knockout
I have and while it seems to be doing a decent job at things I’m bad at it is far from usable for the things i’m actually good at
Which is often a sign for something not being good at anything, only you not being good at assessing something you don’t have expertise in.
See also: journalism about events you’ve actually participated in.
Yes exactly. At least for now, use the AI for things you are not expert at.
I suck at graphic design so I get nanobanana to do that for me.
For simple bugs or creating testcases or easy to describe new features, Codex does it because it does a good job 85%+ of the time saving me a lot.
For really complex race conditions or vast complex enterprise applications… I’m literally an expert at debugging, a minority of human practitioners are better than me. Ofc I do that myself.
Whilst I’ve not used those tools, I’ve used their competitors and they constantly hallucinate methods, parameters, and write pointless unit tests (as in mock a return value and then test for that return value).
4.5 kind of changed everything.
Nothing says “serious journalism” like that article censoring the term “foot fetish”.
You mean the perfect amount?
how am i supposed to put my face between her tits if there’s another tit taking up that space i ain’t got two heads bro
That’s why Zaphod funded Eccentra Gallumbits.
Sometimes I forget lemmy was invented for people exactly like me.
It’s an old reference sir, but it checks out.
Old? How dare you, sir?
You don’t? Commit to intense yoga and stretching and one day you might get there. I have faith in you.
He should try tai-chi walking lol
A handful of titties
They put the feet in the shot to distract from the three boobs.
I came here to say the same thing. Not tiddies, triddies.
Wouldn’t that make the former “duoddies”, then?
Should have been a giveaway, but those people aren’t the sharpest tools in the shed.
First thing I noticed. Like, come ON.
threeddies