34 points hckr78 2 hours ago 29 comments

spottedmarley 1 hour ago | parent

My method is simple:

Did I create the image myself?

Yes: Not AI

No: AI

lucaslazarus 48 minutes ago | parent

AI vs Aye, it was I

SmasherEpilepti 48 minutes ago | parent

> 60 seconds to find out.

> 90s round, 10s per image

> Play 60 seconds

This is confusing. What does "90s round" mean if it's a 60 second game? Is it about the 1990s?

muzani 45 minutes ago | parent

"Made with ♥ by Codex"

EA-3167 39 minutes ago | parent

Slop all the way down, I guess at least if we’re being charitable. If we’re being less charitable this is trying to gamify getting free training data.

skeledrew 5 minutes ago | parent

We all been forced to help train Google's CAPTCHA for years for free, with no benefit. At least here you decide to opt-in or not, and it can potentially help you be more... discerning.

orr94 39 minutes ago | parent

My most effective strategy is to ask: is there any reason for a human to take this picture?

One AI-generated image was a bedside night stand, with no clutter other than a set of keys on top of a receipt. It looked perfectly real, no glitches or weirdness... other than the idea of someone taking a picture of it.

Not a perfect strategy, though; I thought this one was AI for just that reason: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Potted_plant_1_2018-...

markstos 32 minutes ago | parent

But then, some people specialize in taking photos that others would not because they have in mind stock photos, art or something else. They see the world differently.

hn_throwaway_99 28 minutes ago | parent

There are tons of real stock photos with that type of mundane content.

parsimo2010 37 minutes ago | parent

Not bad. I’d appreciate a much longer time limit. Got really rushed at the end. But this was crazy hard on my phone, I was straight guessing most of the time. I think I could be a little better with more time on a desktop screen.

Another idea would be games that were all pictures of a single category- like 10 AI and 10 real pictures of basketballs, or food on plates, etc.

Insanity 32 minutes ago | parent

But I think that your experience is actually the useful one that proves a point. Most people consume content on their phone (e.g instagram) and would usually just scroll by photos. They wouldn’t deeply analyze them.

variety8675 35 minutes ago | parent

I realized this is only somewhat difficult because of the 10s timer. Most people probably don’t spend more than 10s looking at a picture on social media, excellent project.

hn_throwaway_99 25 minutes ago | parent

I thought that at first, but a comment below enlightened me. These types of games are a great way to get free training data.

ori_b 31 minutes ago | parent

We get it. AI slop is getting good enough to replace photography. This isn't good for humans, and makes the world a worse place.

The fact that the suck machine works isn't something to be proud of.

t-writescode 27 minutes ago | parent

That’s not what they’re saying. They’re challenging the “I can always tell” people who are both proud and regularly wrong.

As fake news becomes more and more real and with photo evidence, this matters more and more.

uncomputation 26 minutes ago | parent

Hmm… training data siphon?

VCFundedGenYer 21 minutes ago | parent

Impossible to do on a phone. Zooming in is misinterpreted as a choice. Fix the game.

Also the time limit is stupid and pointless.

sigspec 5 minutes ago | parent

Someone got a low score

Retr0id 21 minutes ago | parent

The time limit did make it quite challenging. I got 1,000 points with a max streak of 8 in a row. On second playthrough I got 3,550 / 12. It seems the AI images all come from a particular area of latent space that's quite easy to recognize once you get dialled in.

So it's more of a "can you detect the GPT Image 2.5 house style", which is an easier problem.

I'd appreciate an untimed mode.

RomanKornev 20 minutes ago | parent

Now add Geoguesser-like battle royale mode with accuracy points for guessing which model generated the image

Jowsey 14 minutes ago | parent

I hadn't been exposed to the new GPT-Image-2.5 model before this, so didn't have any "tells" to go off of, and found it almost impossible to begin with, but it seems the brain is pretty good at adapting for visual stuff! After 2 rounds, I was able to build up a 16-image combo, answering most within a second or two.

I think the "tell" I ended up with is that almost all of the AI images tend to center around a very obvious main "subject" (a flower, a bike, a wrench, etc) – presumably an inherent artefact of generating from a prompt – with everything else around the subject having a very strange depth to it. The depth, focus, and bokeh around the main subject just never look quite right. If you look at an image and find it has a very strong central subject with a little too much depth separation than expected, there's a good chance it's AI.

I recognise that this method of finding a consistent "tell" will probably not hold for future models, unfortunately. Everything else looks almost perfect at this point.

Retr0id 11 minutes ago | parent

It's hard to put into words but the "texture" of GPT-Image-2.5 is just a bit off, like the difference between blue noise and white noise. It's like someone turned up the local contrast just a little too high.

sean2d 5 minutes ago | parent

It would be cool if they published stats on how well people do on average, and how that changes over time and with different models. I feel like in a few years we'll either all be much better at this or completely desensitized, and sadly I'm guessing we're trending towards the latter.