this post was submitted on 08 Apr 2025
316 points (86.4% liked)

Unpopular Opinion

7110 readers
634 users here now

Welcome to the Unpopular Opinion community!


How voting works:

Vote the opposite of the norm.


If you agree that the opinion is unpopular give it an arrow up. If it's something that's widely accepted, give it an arrow down.



Guidelines:

Tag your post, if possible (not required)


  • If your post is a "General" unpopular opinion, start the subject with [GENERAL].
  • If it is a Lemmy-specific unpopular opinion, start it with [LEMMY].


Rules:

1. NO POLITICS


Politics is everywhere. Let's make this about [general] and [lemmy] - specific topics, and keep politics out of it.


2. Be civil.


Disagreements happen, but that doesn’t provide the right to personally attack others. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Please also refrain from gatekeeping others' opinions.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Shitposts and memes are allowed but...


Only until they prove to be a problem. They can and will be removed at moderator discretion.


5. No trolling.


This shouldn't need an explanation. If your post or comment is made just to get a rise with no real value, it will be removed. You do this too often, you will get a vacation to touch grass, away from this community for 1 or more days. Repeat offenses will result in a perma-ban.



Instance-wide rules always apply. https://legal.lemmy.world/tos/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I don't care if it's in a shitposting community, a meme community, or a news community. If the image or text is generated it should be labeled as such, and failing to label it should be grounds to remove the post. AI slop is a plague and its only going to get worse as the tech matures (if it hasn't already peaked).

I'm so tired of having to call it out every time I see it, especially when people in the comments think it's a photoshop work or (heavens help us) real. Human labor has real tangible value that plagiarism machines can't even pretend to imitate and I'm sick of seeing that shit without it being labeled (so I can filter it out).

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago (2 children)

So, anything taken on a current-gen mobile phone, is what you're saying.

[–] johncandy1812 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Yup, I know it is impractical, not only that but because it is a digital recreation it will never be a completely truthful representation of anything. It was the same for film but the changes were understood and accepted. Doctored/manipulated images though were expected to be identified as such, for the most part.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Current-gen mobile phones arent adding fake objects to images

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Photoshop, not AI. Read the context of the discussion

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 days ago (1 children)

By "adding fake objects", i was referring to photoshop

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Nobody claimed it does, so again: read the context of the discussion

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Someone could photoshop an image to add things that arent actually there. In that case, it shouldnt be hidden that the image isnt real. A filter isnt a major enough change for a tag

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Dude, you seem to have missed the original point of the comment. It was sarcasm, and the point was that AI is just the next technological step after photoshop. We had the same discussions decades ago when photoshop was new, with all the purists complaining how photoshop was a horrible technology that would put photographers out of business, they were 'soulless', etc. Now we're rehashing all the same old stupid and tired arguments, but with AI instead of photoshop.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

If something that was made relatively effortlessly is possible to be confused with something made with effort, it should be marked

I suggested banning AI from communities that arent made for AI because it requires so little effort and its so easy to mass-produce, that it could flood a community

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 days ago (1 children)

See my point? Replace 'AI' with photoshop and your exact argument could have come from 2 decades ago.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Could it? I dont think you can mass produce photoshopped images and its much harder to pretend you put effort into something when you didnt (thats why i put relatively)

Even if you could mass produce them and it was easier to fake effort, is anyone doing that? There are people doing those things with AI

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Photoshop is magnitudes of effort less than pre-photoshop technology. The amount of images you can churn out quickly with photoshop is certainly mass production when compared with what you can get done without photoshop, for much less effort.

is anyone doing that? There are people doing those things with AI

Is anyone photoshopping images? Hell yes. Do you think we just invented fake images?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

By "that", i meant mass producing images and making it hard to tell if it was done the hard way or the easy way (while peoplw assuming it was done the hard way)

People dont automatically assume a picture is made by AI the same way they would assume a picture is photoshopped if it was clearly faked

A future where images are all assumed to be made with AI is hopefully obviously bad

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago

By "that", i meant mass producing images and making it hard to tell if it was done the hard way or the easy way (while peoplw assuming it was done the hard way)

No, because the common sense assumption at this point is that everything is done with photoshop or similar technology.

People dont automatically assume a picture is made by AI the same way they would assume a picture is photoshopped if it was clearly faked

They will in a few years. We've been through this whole cycle, is my point. The technology is here to stay, and we're gonna have to adapt to it. No amount of complaining will change it.

A future where images are all assumed to be made with AI is hopefully obviously bad

Why so?