627
They must be the easiest people to scam (thelemmy.club)
submitted 5 months ago by to c/politicalmemes@lemmy.ca
121 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 118 points 5 months ago* (2 children)

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):

image

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 45 points 5 months ago (2 children)

    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".

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 9 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago

    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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -20 points 5 months ago (3 children)

    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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 12 points 5 months ago (2 children)

    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

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 18 points 5 months ago

    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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -13 points 5 months ago

    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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent