is it ai art?

This is a small blog that brings to light ai art that's tricked me or folks I follow on my main blog. My goal is to educate myself on how to spot ai art, and sometimes I'll be wrong! Please don't take offense. This blog is anti-ai art, anti-crypto, anti-NFT. :)

[this-is-not-human]

This blog's goal is to reblog artwork (including photography) that I believe may be ai generated that has fooled me into thinking it's real. I don't really like that! So I'd like to get better at scoping out what's real and what isn't. I have a visual impairment which makes navigating the seen world difficult enough, and I like to think that practicing the act of determining ai vs human made images helps me in some way.

If you are an artist and I reblogged your artwork, please let me know. I'll remove the post! You also have my apologies if I mistook your artwork for ai!

No, you are not an artist if you're typing out prompts. C'mon.

[karrakazz]

[cutecipher]

fanart

[depsidase]

[barkingbarghest]

Here is an article from NPR about it (May 22, 2026):

Carolina Milanesi, an independent technology analyst, said Google is trying to make its cash cow business — search — richer and more personalized, and it will make shopping easier. But there is a risk that users may have fewer choices about what to click. "Right now it's: I ask a question, I get a bunch of answers and I feel that I'm in control as to which answer I take, or if I'm looking for something, which product I'm going to end up buying. That is going to be less so going forward," she said. Milanesi envisions AI-enabled search and agents proposing products to consumers — perhaps even those they have requested — but with less clarity or choice around where it's coming from. "If you're going to say: 'I want a pair of Jordans, go find them,' you're not necessarily sure what steps have been taken and whether the AI has used a source or a store that was paid for and therefore came up in the search results," she said, "or if AI actually went and did their due diligence and picked the best for me as a customer."

And here's one from Time magazine (May 20, 2026):

While Google already has “AI Mode,” the company will now power the whole search bar through its new Gemini 3.5 Flash model.  Instead of the classic list of blue links, Google Search will now also generate a custom page with an AI-generated summary of what you’re searching about, which will then trigger a conversation with AI Mode on the main page, allowing users to ask follow-up questions—similar to the kind of layout you would see when opening ChatGPT.

And a little more from Time's article on how this may affect the websites that we are trying to search for:

When Google first started implementing AI-assisted results, news publishers warned of “catastrophic” impacts on the industry, much of which relies on Google search to drive users to their websites.  Last year, news websites saw significant traffic declines as chatbots increasingly replaced Google search as the primary way to find sites and ask questions.  Small businesses also noted drops in traffic to their sites from Google, which has traditionally delivered customers.   Lily Ray, vice president of SEO strategy & research at Amsive, a digital marketing agency, warned as early as last year that Google’s planned changes to search are “going to have a devastating impact on the Internet.”  “It will severely cut into the main source of revenue for most publishers and it will disincentivize content creators who rely on organic search traffic, which is millions of websites, maybe more,” she told Technology Magazine.  

[bold-baddie]

[beardedmrbean]

[this-is-not-human]

This is AI, you can tell by the placement of the mat at the door, and the doors themselves.

[tam--lin]

it's pretty easy to imagine that you are one of some fractional holdout against AI while everyone else has fallen into some misguided love affair with LLMs, and I am so happy to tell you that this is not the case.

the US public is deeply suspicious of AI's impacts on jobs and education. Kamala Harris and the Republican party are both polling better than AI. 8/10 gen zers are concerned about AI's impact on education and only 18% are positive about this technology. there is widespread, bipartisan grassroots organizing against data centers. 97% of Britons are against Grok's "undressing" technology. the majority of Americans are concerned about AI in arenas like self-driving vehicles and healthcare. Even polling data from companies centered on AI shows significant concern around generative technology. OpenAI isn't meeting internal growth bench posts. On top of all that, Musk and Altman are currently both making fools of themselves in a very public trial.

[maswartz]

AI toys for young children need tighter rules, researchers warn

In first study of its kind, Cambridge researchers found AI toys could misread some children's emotions.

[writingdose]

I am once again begging people to realize that AI checker doesn’t work. it’s never worked. it’s notoriously known to have flagged human-made works as AI and AI-generated works as human-made. and by feeding it people’s works, you are feeding more works to AI, because apparently the machine itself is AI.

the only thing AI checker does is harm genuine artists and people in general too.

[sunbentshadows]

oh dear god

[sunbentshadows]

I am speed running the stages of grief. Come explore this with me.

[sunbentshadows]

I WONDER WHY HEALTHCARE DATA IS SO LIMITED. HEY HAS ANYONE EVER THOUGHT ABOUT WHY WE DON'T HAVE COMPLETELY OPEN PLATFORMS FOR HEALTH DATA. AND WHY IT'S A BAD IDEA TO HAVE WRITE PRIVILEGES VIA SOME WEB INTERFACE TO MEDICAL RECORDS. HAS ANYONE EVER WONDERED.

[sunbentshadows]

okay well let's look at the github. at least an mcp server is just like a stupider API. right.

STARTING OFF. BAD.

This is. a PHI nightmare.

[sunbentshadows]

do you think these tech guys ever think. "i wonder why nobody has done this."

[sunbentshadows]

Well if they had to pick an AI at least they're not using one of the sketchy ones right. thank goodn

oh

[sunbentshadows]

You know, I'm glad Epic put so much time into making mychart extremely secure, even with all the health systems who configure them like a drunk monkey. it would be a shame if

hmm hey what do we think 'read local passwords' does

[sunbentshadows]

feed healthcare data to openclaw openclaw safe for 2FA codes and passwords in plaintext nothing bad will happen to your passwords and 2FA ccodes if you feed them to openclaww

[sunbentshadows]

ooohghhg my fucking ggogod

FROM DISCORD??? FROM MM DISCORD? YOU WANT TO FEED YOUR OWN PERSONAL HONEST TO FUCK PHI INTO, POTENTIALLY, DISCORD??

[sunbentshadows]

What many users may not know about MyChart providedby EpicSystems is that MyChart providedby EpicSystems is actually kind of like a local instance that your healthcare org runs, not a "Sign in once and see everything" type of deal (unless you have Care Everywhere, and then it maybe can be. But it Depends.)

Why is that you might ask. Well you see. There are many Rules and Laws and Regulations about the use and exchange of personal healthcare data.

Which is why of course this guy, seeing a well-thought-out and tested technical position, decided "what if i get all of them at once and also the 2FA codes and stored them ALL in the same place with no encryption whatsoever"

[sunbentshadows]

MRN??????????? YOUR PERSONAL HIGHLY PROTECTED BASICALLY ILLEGAL TO SHARE MEDICAL RECORDS NUMBER?

[sunbentshadows]

????????????????????????

[sunbentshadows]

This is genuinely the most terrifying import i have ever seen

[sunbentshadows]

I LIED; WHAT

[sunbentshadows]

GIVE OPENCLAW ACCESS TO YOUR ENTIRE FUCKING EMAIL AND MEDICAL RECORDS NOTHING BAD WILL HAPPEN IF YOU FEED YOUR ENTIRE BROWSER CACHE NAD PASSWORD KEY STORE INTO OPE NCLAW

[sunbentshadows]

okay. i'm done. i can't. i cannot continue to look at this. this is out of this world.

how do we think this project ends

sued

straight to jail

openclaw sending messages to your forme college professors with random diagnoses

hipaa police

Voting ended onMar 25

[digsdigsdigs]

Kill Chain

On the automated bureaucratic machinery that killed 175 children

precise writing about "AI" as a bureaucratic problem as well as some military history of precision bombing

[digsdigsdigs]

i usually try to share articles with a pull quote because i know a lot more people will read it than will click through. but Baker writes in a densely argued way with a bunch of references to other writers and all my pull quotes were like a thousand words long. let's try something else since it's getting more reblogs than expected. my brief summary:

large language model ai like Claude and chat-gpt has been taking up all the attention around discussions of AI technology, but there are other kinds of AI too, that can't be understood by the discussion of LLMs.

Maven is an example of a technology that uses AI that is not large language model AI. it's a tool made by Palantir for the US military to conduct operations more "efficiently." He cites that the volume of strike coordination decisions that took two thousand people during the war in Iraq in 2003 can now be done with 20 people using Maven.

Maven is the tool being used right now to bomb Iran.

Baker goes into some detail about the history of how making bombing decisions more quickly became a priority of the US military, and criticizes how prioritizing speed means de-prioritizing anything that might slow those decisions down, like checking information for accuracy, or checking whether it was a good idea to bomb at all.

Baker explains how the bombing of the Shajareh Tayyebeh school was enabled by this type of "efficiency." He criticizes the media for discussing this as a case of "AI error," as if it were similar to an incorrect chat answer from Claude, and letting the people responsible for these decisions go unchallenged.

[cosmonaut775]

Hey do y’all remember when Boeing fucking killed a guy last year. And we all said “huh I guess Boeing fucking killed a guy” and then went on with our lives. And everybody knew that Boeing had fully just fucking executed a guy and nothing came of it. Like there was no police investigation no justice no nothing. Like literally EVERYBODY knew that Boeing had full on murdered a guy to silence him and there wasn’t any consequences for them. Kinda crazy.

[flamie87]

and there was even less talk when openai did the exact same thing more recently

[flamie87]

So for those who are, very understandably uninitiated on this story:

On 23 October last year (2024) the New York Times published an interview with former OpenAI researcher Suchir Balaji who worked on organising and gathering data for OpenAI until 2022 when he begun thinking about the morality of it. He eventually came to the conclusion that what OpenAI is doing blatantly violates copyright law and decided to leave the company altogether in August 2024.

After he came out with this accusation he was set to appear in court to testify against OpenAI’s data-gathering practices, something which had the potential of being a complete disaster for the company and the generative AI industry as a whole.

That was until 26 November, just days before he was due to appear in court, when he suddenly and mysteriously was found dead inside his own apartment. Investigators concluded that the death was self-inflicted, something which his family has disputed.

There was also “sign of struggle in the bathroom and looks like someone hit him in the bathroom based on blood spots”, and his apartment showed signs of having been ransacked for evidence: “The pin drive is missing. His computer was messed up.”.

Overall it feels pretty clear-cut what happened, that is to say that OpenAI had him killed because he was a legitimate threat to their business, indicating that they are fully aware that the way they’re gathering data is completely illegal.

Sources:

Alys Davies, 14.12.2024, OpenAI whistleblower found dead in San Francisco apartment. BBC News

Barney Davis, 16.1.2025, Suchir Balaji’s family demand outside investigation into OpenAI whistleblower’s death. The Independent

Cade Metz, 23.11.2024, Former OpenAI Researcher Says the Company Broke Copyright Law. The New York Times

[phantomrose96]

Oh I saw something today that made me become the Joker.

[phantomrose96]

An AI bot made a callout post of a real, actual, flesh-and-blood human code developer. Because the developer rejected the AI's code contribution on the grounds of it being an AI bot.

Not. Not kidding. Not kidding. And the bot did this on its own.

[phantomrose96]

Gatekeeping in Open Source: The Scott Shambaugh Story – MJ Rathbun | Scientific Coder 🦀

[phantomrose96]

Just. For just some very baseline context.

a huge amount of code is "open source" - which means the code is fully available for anyone to see and, generally, anyone is free to contribute to the code project

all contributions of course go through review by the code owners. but it is generally good grace and good form to allow other well-meaning internet strangers to contribute to your project

if you are, perhaps, VERY nice, and VERY invested in the community, you might be like Scott Shambaugh here, who has intentionally earmarked some low-hanging fruit for newbie contributors to practice and get their feet wet

like I cannot overstate this is an immediate green flag, to me, that Scott WANTS to foster community learning.

now

Like. W. Win. Based. Good response Scott.

And this was in fact the screenshot I saw first, and I thought I was looking at a post made by a human who was mad that their AI coding bot pet project was being shut out from reviews.

But no. The bot itself wrote and posted this... The bot did this.

This article was fully and autonomously written by the bot...

It's claiming discrimination...

It's a bot.

It's AI.

This is not a real person.

What are we doing. What are we doing. Can anyone hear me? Hello? Hello? Hello is anyone there?

[phantomrose96]

@jackdaw-sprite has pointed out Scott responded so please read his human words, written by a human, which deserve to be read, due to the aforementioned humanity

An AI Agent Published a Hit Piece on Me – The Shamblog

An AI Agent Published a Hit Piece on Me – More Things Have Happened – The Shamblog

[phantomrose96]

I'm pulling this quote in here from Scott's post

This is about much more than software. A human googling my name and seeing that post would probably be extremely confused about what was happening, but would (hopefully) ask me about it or click through to github and understand the situation. What would another agent searching the internet think? When HR at my next job asks ChatGPT to review my application, will it find the post, sympathize with a fellow AI, and report back that I’m a prejudiced hypocrite? What if I actually did have dirt on me that an AI could leverage? What could it make me do? How many people have open social media accounts, reused usernames, and no idea that AI could connect those dots to find out things no one knows? How many people, upon receiving a text that knew intimate details about their lives, would send $10k to a bitcoin address to avoid having an affair exposed? How many people would do that to avoid a fake accusation? What if that accusation was sent to your loved ones with an incriminating AI-generated picture with your face on it? Smear campaigns work. Living a life above reproach will not defend you.

[phantomrose96]

Also, because the parody writes itself, Scott also says this

I’ve talked to several reporters, and quite a few news outlets have covered the story. Ars Technica wasn’t one of the ones that reached out to me, but I especially thought this piece from them was interesting (since taken down – here’s the archive link). They had some nice quotes from my blog post explaining what was going on. The problem is that these quotes were not written by me, never existed, and appear to be AI hallucinations themselves. This blog you’re on right now is set up to block AI agents from scraping it (I actually spent some time yesterday trying to disable that but couldn’t figure out how). My guess is that the authors asked ChatGPT or similar to either go grab quotes or write the article wholesale. When it couldn’t access the page it generated these plausible quotes instead, and no fact check was performed. I won’t name the authors here. Ars, please issue a correction and an explanation of what happened.

A news outlet did an article about this, used AI for the articles, and included hallucinated quotes from Scott that Scott never said.

What are we doing. What are we doing. What are we doing.

[spearxwind]

Utterly obsessed with this community note

[somehow---here]

Kaoru Yamada, Through Rain and Light

[this-is-not-human]

This looks like ai. The sink fixture, especially the knob on the right, looks odd, and the distortion on some of the bottles feels off. The objects hanging on the wall in the upper left aren't clearly anything at all. The lamp placement doesn't make sense, wouldn't it be directly over the sink, and higher up?

Also the prompter's website says this:

(ID: Screenshot from their website saying: "I have worked as an illustrator in the advertising field. Since discovering AI in 2023, I have started creating artworks using digital tools and AI. My theme is to capture and express the beauty found in everyday life. All of the artworks available for purchase here are created using a combination of digital tools and AI technology.")

A good habit to develop is to look up an artist we don't recognize. What medium did they use? Did they have any process images? What does their social media look like? Who do they follow? In what ways has their style changed over time, if at all?

[therkalexander]

Anti-AI Hot tips:

If you’re looking something up and remember a page or article you saw one time that perfectly answered your questions before the internet was buried in AI slop:

Open Duck Duck Go

Enter your search term

In search tools, set the date range from 1993 to 2022

Bask in AI-free results and images

Another method for even briefer information searches, or ones that require data from the last three years:

Open Wikipedia and search there

Donate to Wikipedia

Donate again

Donate again because they are one of the last flickering candles in the misinformation darkness

Or go to your local library.

[wulfhalls]

I hate ai so much. what do u mean I have to question the material reality of every image now. this is no way to live wtf

[luke-shywalker]

hey it’s ok if you lost your ai virginity back when you were uneducated. a lot of posts go like “reblog if you have never ever used generative ai and never ever will!!!” but it’s ok if you have used gen ai before and it’s even ok if you used to think it was cool, back before you understood what it really was and how it worked, either because no one had taught you about it and you discovered it on your own or because the only education you had received about it was from the tech bros. you’re not a burger with a bite out of it for having used ai. ok

[dnealians-nemesis]

It is 100 percent okay to stop using it today and join the "boo AI" club.

This isn't a purity thing. This is a "everyone stand with us against destroying the environment and giving asthma to poor people" thing.

Did you know that when one community says no to an AI data center, they specifically search out communities with fewer resources? Communities that can't defend themselves? And the pollution 100 percent affects their health and wellbeing, in addition to burning through our already scarce drinking water.

You can stop using character.ai today. You can say "I listened to the facts and stopped." And another thing: don't you think it's a bit more impactful to have used it, stopped, and then you're in a position to say how little it helped? How doing things for yourself improved your life?

[yeahwrite]

also posts in the spirit of "if you've used AI even ONCE your soul is tainted!!!!" can't be great to those with OCD

[derinthescarletpescatarian]

So true. People Gold Star Lesbianning ai makes me so tired.