lol, the algorithm serves it up and I often lack self-control! Apparently, I'm respectful enough to avoid a ban. A mild critique of some pro mods don't be so quick to ban. respectful discussion is healthy.
LOL, I can't even pronounce oegopsid cephalopods, oh and I think it's fair to say that as we have only seen oegopsid cephalopods in fossil's humans can't really make an accurate one either.
I am a little dyslexic so this may just be me but some of those signatures seem completely unreadable.
The type of background is different, the ai's version is sort of a more rustic design featuring multiple colors but the art one features just red in different brightness and slight tone shifts.
That's just to say, you didn't prove them entirely wrong, though your point still has merit (and this is me just pointing out differences from what the OOP was saying, not errors in the ai's work)
I'd argue a signature isn't classroom cursive and it's quite ordinary for them to be illegible.
The background, your point is valid, but it's a language issue of mine rather than an ai issue. I simply don't know how to describe what I see with that. Sampling his background would have been trivial, but would ruin my point entirely
Type make an image and its making all visual decisions, pretty sure that the majority of people who are very anti without any nuance are just seeing the 1 and done template type prompt ai images that are produced on mass by people.
The quality gap between ai images that have no human direction or concept behind them, and ones that have lots of direction and concept behind them is much closer than art made directly so people don't see the decisions, effort or skill gap between them.
The original post says "No AI could do this," then repeatedly uses "NEVER" to describe what AI supposedly can't do.
I understand you're trying to give the original poster some grace in interpreting what they meant. But then you frame it as AI making a choice, and now you're asking me to extend that same grace to your wording.
That's fine, but at some point, we should be able to acknowledge that the original claim was simply wrong.
I thought they were honest questions. I can see how they might be interpreted in a negative way. Personally, I only down vote blankly unconstructive comments
Apparently, yes, and you led me to find something incredibly interesting: the Japanese kanji for "neko" and the Chinese hanzi for "mao" are written the same way.
I just learned the words "kanji" and "hanzi" are also written the exact same way... this is so interesting. Thank you for making me find this out. I had no idea they had this many symbols in common. The phonetics are completely different.
15
u/AbbyTheOneAndOnly 5h ago
going to that sub expecting good takes will leave you disappointed lmao