- cross-posted to:
- technik@feddit.org
You must log in or # to comment.
Evidence of Ai anything discourages me in general, with the only exception so far being the background visuals at a gig using AI to morph between images. I’m pretty sure that the images were initially the work of one of the band members, and they’d used AI to melt and morph them from one to the next in an incredibly trippy way. It was pretty fitting, the band are the incomparable Psychedelic Porn Crumpets, and were probably the best thing at Glasto last year
If I ever take my blog seriously (I don’t; it’s just an “idea sink”), I’ll make sure to include a few AI-generated images to shoo assumers like the writer.
It makes me wonder if the text in the blog posts is AI-generated to some extent.
I think that it’s fine, as long as the picture is just an additional and the focus is the text.
I’d rather see a shitty Microsoft Paint drawing as opposed to some AI image.
I got some, made with Kolourpaint.
I just assume everything written in blogs now is AI content anyway.
As someone who has written a blog for 20 years, no.
And stop calling me a bot just because I have Intro and Conclusion sections. That’s just good, well-structured content.
I mean you don’t, but the inclusion of AI images is not some kind of definitive indicator of AI text, anymore than the absence of one indicates the absence of the other.
I’m sorry, but this is a weird take. Are you going to also argue that low quality images suggest low quality text? Maybe read the text, do some research and come to your own conclusions around the veracity of the content, like you ideally should be doing anyway.
This. Blog writers aren’t always artists. Let us focus on our writing.
