“Hey, is this AI?” Blog Post 6

I dont know about the rest of you, but my mother loves to scroll through Facebook. And I frequently receive the question: “Hey Marv, is this real or AI?” As she holds up the most ridiculous, clearly AI-generated image imaginable. The online art community has been raging a war against AI art for quite some time now, so I’ve seen the strategies people have been employing to sniff them out. The first thing I like to look for is hands and feet. These seem to be the hardest thing for AI to get right (Which is funny because hands and feet are also the bane of most human artists’ existence). I’ve inserted an AI generated image from DALL-E to explain my points.

In this image I’ve used three different colors to highlight the three main things I look for in an AI-generated image.

1.) The red circles. Hands, feet, and faces. You can see that the hands on these figures are melting into the objects they are holding, have the wrong amount of fingers, and are often blurred in strange ways. The faces will sometimes be twisted into in-human expressions, with mouthes drooping or lopsided and eyes blacked out or morphed in unnatural ways. When there are many figures in an image it is more likely that the AI will make more noticeable mistakes and just completely mess up the face like the angel at the top that I have circled- so it’s always important to look at background characters.

2.) The yellow circles. Objects being morphed either into themselves, into things or people around them, looking smudged, or having unrecognizable additions to them.

3.) The purple/pink circles. These are masses or amalgamations in the image that feel out of place, like they are being used to fill up space. These may appear as just globs of shapes and fragments of other features in the image thrown together into a blurry smudgy lump of nothing.

I’d like to add one more example photo. This prompt was much simpler so the AI was able to generate a more accurate photo.

In this image I have highlighted four things that are good indicators of an AI-generated photo-real image.

1.) The red circle. Again, the hands and feet. You can see the fingernails on the hand are strange and the ring finger was not rendered properly. The legs are crossed but the feet do not line up the where the ankles are.

2.) The green circle. Most AI-generated images put gibberish in place of actual words, sometimes even avoiding real letter all-together in favor of made-up symbols.

3.) The yellow circle. Clothes often don’t fold in correct ways. As you can see, the hood morphs into the hair and comes up at a different angle than where it should to connect to the other side of the neck.

4.) The purple circle. Most of the furniture looks realistic, but there will almost always be a slip-up. The two pillows on the sofa are melted together.

One last thing I want to say is that some of these things can be found in art done by humans, so it’s important to look at the context of the whole image. Some people choose to stylize the human figure in ways that are not technically natural, but it should match up with the rest of the aesthetic of the piece. The same with melting or morphed objects- this could be a stylistic choice, so it’s important to look at the whole thing and possibly the other work posted on the account or profile to see more of the person’s portfolio if at all possible!

-Marvin Stearns

Are enhancements ethical? Blog Post 5

synthesize your thinking about ethics and enhancement. This can take the form of a story, a small experiment, or just a normal short essay like post.

The question that I see so many people debating: “is bio-enhancement ethical?” Feels like a pointless one. Looking at the issue in binary terms creates a void argument, in my opinion. Is it wrong to do some fiddling with genetics to make your kid taller or smarter? I don’t know, and honestly I don’t care. The issue is so much bigger than the moral implications of some kids being taller or faster or more attractive because their parents could afford special pre-natal meddling. This is already happening regardless. Higher income families can afford to get their kids after school tutoring, access to WiFi in their homes, ample time for extra curriculars to put on college resumes, consistent healthy meals, health insurance, the financial possibility of paying for private schooling and higher education, and so much more. Furthermore, some kids are just born naturally tall, fast, intelligent, attractive, etc. Is widening that gap between the haves and the have-not’s through genetic modifications good? No, thats not what I’m suggesting. Then is it perfectly acceptable to go ahead and work towards making these an option? Also no. I believe that the morality of these enhancements is irrelevant in the society we currently live in. Our time, money, energy, and resources should be spent working on making success and flourishing more accessible to low income families through affordable healthcare, universal basic income, special attention to headstart programs and affordable child-care, accessible mental health services, public school funding, and so so much more. Until we fix all the problems we’ve already created for ourselves, I think that the conversation of genetic enhancements needs to stay on the shelf.

-Marvin Stearns