#AI sucks

[rebeccathenaturalist]

hey there! fellow naturalist (albeit less experienced!) here! in regards to the AI-generated ID guides, do you have any advice for helping the general public learn to recognize them? are there any giveaways other than incorrect information a layperson might not pick up on that we can tell people to watch out for?

Hi, @fischotterkunst! It's a messy topic, to be sure, but here's what I've been seeing of these AI-generated texts, at least on Amazon:

--If you sort your search for "foraging book" or "mushroom hunting" or whatever search string you use by "Newest Arrivals", you'll notice that there is a glut of books that have come out in the past few weeks. Yes, there are always new books, but this is at a higher than normal rate, which suggests AI is behind at least some of them. There ARE occasionally real authors' books that just happened to come out recently, so don't dismiss every single book that is a fresh release. Use the other criteria below.

--They will invariably be self-published or from some publisher with zero online presence. Not a problem by itself; my own chapbooks are self-published on Amazon KDP. But they come out every three months, not every three days, because I am researching, writing, and editing them all myself, rather than churning out content with AI.

--The titles and subtitles are often very long and stuffed with keywords. They are obviously optimized for search engines rather than being descriptive of the book and they have a rather clunky fashion.

--Look for obvious typos and other errors; for example, in the image above we have "WILD MUSHROOM COOKBOOK FOR BEGINNER: The complete guide on mushroom foraging and cooking with delicious recipes to enjoy your favorite". It should be "for beginners", and the subtitle just...ends prematurely. Favorite what? Favorite mushrooms? Favorite cartoon characters? Favorite color? Also, while there are lot of variations on name spellings, "Magaret" instead of "Margaret" stands out as a possible fake in combination with other clues. (All her other books also have this spelling, though.)

--This is a BIG one: Who's the author? Check their bio. In the above image you'll see that "Jason Cones", the author of "The Wild Edible Plants Forager's Handbook: A Beginner's Guide to Safe Foraging, Including How to Identify Edible Plants, Learn About Their Medicinal Properties, and Prepare Them for Cooking", has a very generic picture and bio that has pretty obviously been generated by AI. If you search for him online, the only page for an author named Jason Cones is the Amazon author page--no website, no social media, no interviews, nada. Even a brand new author will at least have something other than their Amazon page, and they'll mention experience, credentials, other biographical info.

--Look at the author's other books. Magaret seems to focus on cookbooks of very specific sorts, but again they've all come out in a very short time. They also tend to often be on really super-specific niche subjects--this, again, is not a red flag in and of itself, but it's a common pattern with AI "authors". Jason Cones, on the other hand, has written over two dozen books not just about foraging but anger management techniques, acupressure, and weed gummies, and all of his titles have come out since last December.

--If all the books have the same cover but slight differences in title, it's also a big red flag. There are reputable publishers of regional foraging guides like Timber Press, but their books are written by multiple authors and have come out over a long stretch of years (plus they're a well-known publisher with a solid track record, online presence, etc.) Also notice the typos in the title and subtitle; everyone says "Mushroom Foraging", not "Mushrooms Foraging", and "Keep Track Your Mushroom Sightings" is missing "of".

--Compare the descriptions of multiples of these new books and you start seeing patterns. If you look at the images above, you'll notice that both Lorna K. Thompson's "Foraging Recipe Cookbook" and Kevin Page's "The Ultimate Foraging Guide for Seniors" have a very similar formulaic description. They start with a brief story about a person in a town or village who discovers some foraging secrets and then transforms his life, and then a list of things you're supposedly going to find in this seemingly miraculous book. This basically reads like "Hey, ChatGPT, tell me a story of a person who improved their life with foraging in two hundred words or less!" Also, the ends got cut off of my screen shot, but they both end with "GET YOUR COPY TODAY!"

I have not purchased any of these books to verify how awful the content is, but what little content I can see in the previews is uniformly formulaic and, again, reads like someone asked an AI to write content on a topic with some specific keywords thrown in. Needless to say, I do NOT recommend any of these books.

Also, I feel really bad for any actual authors who released their books in the past few months. They're likely getting drowned out by this AI junk, though hopefully they're getting enough attention for their work through their publishers, social media, etc. to get some sales. Support your real-life authors, and boycott AI!

Finally, PLEASE reblog this! It's really, really important that people know what to look for, and the more posts we have floating around with this info, the less likely it is someone's going to get poisoned by following what these books have to say.

[darlingdekarios]

just a reminder that using AI bots to generate your favorite voice actor's voice singing songs/saying lines you want to hear them say is explicitly harmful to their work! many VAs have begged for this to stop, PLEASE do not perpetuate it.

[so-i-did-this-thing]

lmao

[hiighstriing]

🐍

medusa gorgon!! might get back into soul eater idk guys

[pimentogirl]

The thing I hate most about AI imagery is how suspicious it has made me of the work of fellow artists.

I feel like I can't just enjoy and celebrate the work of others without launching into a full background check. Even though generally speaking the AI generated stuff gives off uncanny vibes.

[wk-artist]

Basically Pencils are a slur…

So wild Kratts used a slur

Lets spam PENCILS TO MAKE AI “ARTISTS” MAD

[fluffielox]

please don’t feed the ai

[dailyjermasparkle]

Just turned off third party sharing for all 15 of my side blogs!

[cjbee]

So apparently tumblr might be (probably is) doing a deal with midjourney to steal peoples art to train AI… guess I will have to go glaze and/or nightshade everything…

Why does my dystopian future not come with cool cybernetic limbs and a cyberpunk aesthetic?

[sisile]

Oh GUYS

I tried to find Ed sheeran NIGHTS but I found something terrifying

[jerzwriter]

Bruh. The use of AI for creative purposes pisses me off to no end.

I just spoke to a friend who is a college professor. He said use of AI to “write” papers is so rampant now, he is requiring all essays and papers to be written in class by hand. Including mid-terms and finals.

I told him I am a writer, I never got less than an A on any paper I wrote in college, and AI didn’t exist back then. But I would have never have been able to do that. I don’t write once and done. Everything is a draft. I make changes to everything, and that is not possible if I am writing by hand in class.

Not to mention that with an anxiety disorder and ADHD, I would have been put at a great disadvantage… yet I was a straight A student who never cheated.

He said it makes him sick, but the thought if giving an A to some utter asshole who used AI, and a C to a student that truly worked their ass off is too much for him.

I asked my kid if this happens at her university, and she said it does. I am so glad I went to school when I did.

Oh, and AI fucking sucks and this just gives me one more reason to hate it.

Carry on.

[wowright-art]

People still post on this officially sanctioned AI scalping website?

[deadthingposting]

Sometimes I fear ai but then I remember that it doesn't matter how smart it gets AI is still controlled by humans and by default slave to the stupidity of silicon Valley startup idiots

Case in point let me tell you dear readers about the new AI app called Calmara this wonderful tool of Artificial intelligence promises to revolutionize hookup culture by prioritizing safe sex practices

How? you may ask

Well in the heat of the moment during you getting going on with a person with a penis you may ask them to hold up a moment before taking off your phone and asking them to stay still while you take pictures of their dick so the AI will identify if the dick is healthy

I'm not joking

Worse this sti identifying data stealing mess is being promoted to women, yes a app to identify weird stuff on a dick is being promoted to women as another layer of safe sex

This is the fucking future ladies and gents taking a dick pick of an stranger so an ai can tell you " maybe don't let him hit it raw he may have syphilis or a very odd dick"

[spicy-universe]

I absolutely despise AI and all who support. Never interact with me if you encourage that shit. AI art is not art. There is no such thing as an "AI artist". Voice actors are having their voices stolen. I don't care what "good things" come out of it i want it all gone. Learn to do art yourselves you lazy, unimaginative fuck. Impressions aren't that hard, and hiring someone who can do them is even easier. Using them for shitposts isn't ok either. You're still using them for their intended purpose. "But AI will never be a substitute for the real thing" try telling that to the companies who are using ai art for their tv show intros (Marvel) or companies planning on using ai voices for video games (Microsoft). Non-voice actors and Non-artists don't understand the struggles that come with the work involved. And they're the same ones taking your work from you.

[spaceshiphorror]

important things to look out for when identifying AI art

im only calling it "AI art" to grab attention. it's not actual AI, it's just procedural image generation. but yeah, if you're against this form of image generation like i am, look out for these things to check if it's real art or a phony!!

hands

the most common and obvious one. hands are weird, and very complicated to draw. "AI art" is typically very bad at rendering realistic hands. look out for extra fingers and physically impossible gestures/anatomy!

lettering

in generating an image, a program doesn't see letters the same way we do. we look at a letter as part of an alphabet, but this software just sees it as more lines in a drawing, if that makes sense. it doesn't know about the existence of actual letters, so it just kinda scribbles. typically it'll look like an actual letter but with extra lines or wiggles or whatever

symbols

this is referring to flags or other iconography. we look at a flag with an abstract drawing of a lion and go, "oh, that's a lion." not software! it sees the shape of what it's looking at, but not what it's meant to represent, leading to some wacky nonsense!

watermarks

since these software programs are literally just generating images from a pool of artworks, and artworks typically have a signature or watermark, they will tend to add something like that. except, because it doesn't understand language, it's not actually writing anything, it's just scribbling. laugh at the poor illiterate bozos

greebles

a greeble in art is a term for any little miscellaneous detail added to an object to give it more depth, realism, or cool detail. these are typically buttons on computer consoles, engravings in armor, or wires and cabling in a server room. a human being has the context and understanding of what they're creating to add greebles that are realistic or symbolic. a procedural image generator does not. this leads to a lot of strange random lines and dots, like a wall covered with glue having pebbles and bits of string thrown at it for no reason.

happy trails fellas

[ikeromantic]

Update on this blog!

Blog Update!

I don't know if any of you have noticed, but I moved my blog to only be viewable if you're logged into Tumblr. I didn't want to do this, but I did want to limit AI scrapers' access to what I write. I love getting to share stories here with people that have nothing more in common with me that a love for the same fandoms and an enthusiasm for fiction. I do not write and share to train someone's text generating AI project.

I have never worried about who reads what I post or even much cared how it was used. Because that's what you agree to when you post things online. You're giving up most of your rights by sharing your text online. I know that.

But I've been increasingly uncomfortable with the idea of AI using my texts to learn how to write. To imitate my style and characterizations. And then to use these freely shared texts to put writers out of work. To flood literary markets with AI text and make it just that much harder to get published or to have anyone notice your self-publication.

AI is meant to be a tool to help guide you to use a better word or phrase, as with grammar programs. To assist in drafting reports and filling out forms. For private use and personal enjoyment. And for people living with disabilities that need that extra help to write or draw or whatever the AI is designed to assist with. AI should not be replacing real people who make real stories and real art.

ChatGPT and similar aren't human, capable of creating something new or interesting. AI written text is an amalgam of all the writing the creators stole when building their program. A regurgitation of the words and phrases drafted out by little amateurs like me to fantastic authors of classics no longer copyright protected.

I do not want to contribute to AI development. I can't see another way to stop them scraping content besides requiring viewers to have a login. Other than, perhaps, shutting this down all together. Hopefully this is enough. Maybe in another year or two when the laws catch up to tech, I can take the privacy setting off again. Or it will get worse and I really will have to stop sharing. Sigh.

So, long story short TL;DR - I don't want AI to use my stories so you have to be logged into Tumblr to read them.