this post was submitted on 05 Oct 2024
832 points (98.0% liked)

Science Memes

10539 readers
1910 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.


Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] DillyDaily@lemmy.world 50 points 22 hours ago (4 children)

As a visually impaired person on the internet. YES! welcome to our world!

You're lucky enough to get an image description that helpfully describes the image.

That description rarely tells you if it's AI generated, that's if the description writer even knows themselves.

Everyone in the comments saying "look at the hands, that's AI generated", and I'm sitting here thinking, I just have to trust the discussion, because that image, just like every other image I've ever seen, is hard to fully decipher visually, let alone look for evidence of AI.

[–] P4ulin_Kbana@lemmy.eco.br 2 points 2 hours ago

I'm sorry that you have to go through this stuff.

[–] JackbyDev@programming.dev 19 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

Alt text: a beautiful girl on a dock at sunset with some fugly hands and broken ass fingees

[–] Adalast@lemmy.world 10 points 14 hours ago (2 children)

Honestly, auto generating text descriptions for visually impaired people is probably one of the few potential good uses for LLM + CLIP. Being able to have a brief but accurate description without relying on some jackass to have written it is a bonefied good thing. It isn't even eliminating anyone's job since the jackass doesn't always do it in the first place.

[–] SGforce@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 hours ago

The models that do that now are very capable but aren't tuned properly IMO. They are overly flowery and sickly positive even when describing something plain. Prompting them to be more succinct only has them cut themselves off and leave out important things. But I can totally see that improving soon.

I am so sorry, and i agree with your point, but i really had a good laugh at my mental image of a bonefied good thing :-)

If you know already or it's autocorrect, just ignore me, if not, it's bona fide :-)

[–] SaharaMaleikuhm@feddit.org 2 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

Is there no software that can just tell you if it's AI generated or not?

[–] 0ops@lemm.ee 4 points 7 hours ago

They exist but none of them are perfect - they can't possibly be perfect. It's a bit of an arms race thing where AI images get more accurate and the detection software get more particular to match, however the economic incentives are on the side of the former.

[–] thirteene@lemmy.world 8 points 19 hours ago

I've never seen a good answer to this in accessibility guides, would you mind making a recommendation? Is there any preferred alt text for something like:

  • "clarification image with an arrow pointing at object"
  • "Picture of a butt selfie, it's completely black"
  • "Picture of a table with nothing on it"
  • "example of lens flare shown from camera"
  • "N/A" dangerous

Sometimes an image is clearly only useful as a visual aid, I feel like "" (exluding it) makes people feel like they are missing the joke. But given it's an accessibility tool; unneeded details may waste your time.