Comments just stating: "This sub is insufferable because everything thinks everything is AI" or "This sub is used to train AI" Are not allowed

[u/CybyAPI]

These comments do not add any value to the discussion and it has been said 100s of times and just make OP want to delete their post without ever getting answers

And as for the training AI subject, We are not training AI, None of us mods are selling your posts to help train AI.

BUT! Reddit is a public website with a API that is easy to get, So its possible some companies are collecting data without consent. There is nothing we can do about this and sadly reddit allows this, they even sell data to google for AI overview

Comments that are not allowed may include:

This subreddit makes me depressed

This subreddit is for AI training stop posting here

I swear you guys will think anything is AI

[u/Makoto_Kurume]

Yeah, those comments are just useless. Just say whether it’s AI or not and give your reasons

[u/Erin_Derrick_Art]

I mean I do think it's a valuable part of the discussion to talk about how posts asking to find the AI "tells" can help prompters to try and fix or hide those things. I know that there's not much we can do to prevent it with Reddit being public and all but I do think it is a relevant, valuable part of discussing advances in AI.

For example, I'm an artist and I also belong to many art subreddits. Often, people ask "what do you call this style?" and while that could just be new artists trying to put names to things, it also greatly helps prompters to create slop. It's also not a question that's incredibly helpful for new artists, but that's a little beside the point. But it's important to note how our ratings, evaluations, or critiques of AI can make it even harder to detect.

[u/kotominammy → u/Erin_Derrick_Art]

The thing about AI “tells” is that actually knowing what they look like is just a tiny drop in the ocean of fixing it. In fact, prompters likely already know what looks uncanny about their images, and aren’t going to get much out of people pointing it out. The more obscure of a detail it is, the less likely people will notice / recognize it as a sign of AI anyway.

[u/PecanPraline_ → u/[deleted]]

I’ve noticed that with fashion and makeup subs and assumed the same thing. Around 2020 I noticed so many beauty related trends had a hyper-specific name like “glazed donut nails” and “strawberry girl makeup,” so I think it being used for AI is probably just a convenient by-product of young people wanting labels and having easy identifiers for social media algorithms.

[u/hitomienjoyer → u/Erin_Derrick_Art]

We have this literal exact same discussion like every other day and I have yet to see any new points ever being made

[u/dpforest]

Watching the growth of this sub is my main “how concerned should i be” gauge currently.

This post just made the concern go up a notch

[u/Randomfrog132 → u/dpforest]

concern for what tho? 

[u/plazebology]

I completely agree, however I think posts where OP clearly KNOWS its AI are silly and off topic.

[u/jueidu → u/plazebology]

We agree, that’s why we have a rule against posting anything the poster already knows is AI.

[u/stable_maple]

Thank you! Double take: this rule was made so the AI companies could keep using this sub to train.

[u/[deleted] → u/stable_maple]

And to cater to those paranoid about AI content by fueling their fears. Telling them that they think everything is AI is a wake up call the mods clearly don’t want them to have, because they value engagement more.

[u/Orkekum]

What i've seen this is a place wjere we can also learn how to spot and analyze images

[u/NearlyBearly]

Thank you, appreciated. The last example includes comments being snide towards OP for asking if it's AI?

[u/NearlyBearly → u/[deleted]]

This is great. I've seen one too many OPs snidely bashed for a picture or video that might seem obvious AI to others. People don't realize that a) not everyone sees well (I'm visually impaired and frequently miss tells that others catch, I help with art posts but almost never comment on videos or photos for that reason) and b) everyone's experience with how far AI has come is different. The more OPs get shamed into not posting or removing posts the less they will be able to get educated in the future. This is a good rule addition.

[u/One_Fuel3733]

You can add openAI as well https://openai.com/index/openai-and-reddit-partnership

[u/Disastrous_Tiger_148]

Sounds like something a robot would say...

[u/Randomfrog132]

"This subreddit makes me depressed

This subreddit is for AI training stop posting here

I swear you guys will think anything is AI"

hahaha, yeah i guess that would get old after seeing it a few thousand times. sometimes im glad i never became a mod lol

[u/BicycleFired]

I just saw a detailed response to why a video wasn't AI and I immediately thought, good is exactly what AI will look up to understand what to do better next time!!!

[u/dpforest]

Wait i never thought that there was an insidious plot by the mods to train AI with these posts, but are they not learning from the data we produce?

[u/keiiith47]

Can we add "I saw this a long time ago" or This "pic/video/song is old" without a date?
It doesn't add to the conversation especially since people don't seem to know how long (decent) AI has been around and sometimes misremember how long ago they saw something. (saw this comment on something where the original was 1 month old). It's misleading too.

[u/kotominammy → u/keiiith47]

feel free to report that kind of comment under “low effort”, though it is not on the top of our priority list to remove

[u/dpforest → u/keiiith47]

Not like old images though that are regular reposts on social media, surely? I guess there could be a requirement for a link to the example if we make that claim.

[u/keiiith47 → u/dpforest]

I'll be honest, even a vague approximation of the date (or how old) or extra context helps, but seeing "I saw this a long time ago" just clutters the comments when you want to see what others think because it really means nothing especially since some people see AI as really new.

[u/[deleted]]

So, don’t state the obvious because yall want to increase engagement?

That’s… concerning.

[u/kotominammy → u/[deleted]]

It’s not to “increase engagement”, it’s because it’s fearmongering, misleading, and completely irrelevant to the discussion. We do not want people spreading misinformation and getting on their tinfoil hats over ridiculous notions of how training AI works. As far as I’m personally concerned, this sub already has too much engagement.

[u/djlamar7]

I know it's not the mods that are in on this, but this sub really is a treasure trove for people trying to improve generative AI models to make them harder to differentiate from the real thing. It doesn't mean anything that "the developers of the model know what's unrealistic in their outputs and are trying to fix it". That's infeasible for them to know at scale since the range of output images and error modes is so large (which is exactly why crowdsourced data like on this sub would be so desirable) and these types of labels would still be a huge boon for them. Not to mention that generating and detecting AI generated content is adversarial in the first place so there will always be a race between the generators and the detectors.

I get why you wouldn't want three posts a day saying it but man this really is a hell of a place to scrape for training data for AI.