Read a paper that said AI art detectors are basically guessing 30% of the time

One dev's breakdown showed their detection model flagged a stock photo of a cat as 92% AI generated, and now I'm wondering how many people got falsely accused on those art platforms, anyone else seen proof these things are just broken?

2 comments

2 Comments

lane.eric6d ago

Feels like people are overreacting a bit. These detectors are just automated tools, they're not a court of law or anything. If someone's whole career or reputation is riding on what a flawed algorithm says, then yeah, save your files. But for most daily drama on art sites, a quick "here's my Procreate timelapse" shuts it down instantly. Kinda seems like the bigger worry is that these platforms even USE these broken detectors to auto-flag people without any human review in the first place.

gavin_kelly916d ago

Stock photo of a cat at 92% is wild but honestly not surprising. I tested one of those detectors with my own digital paintings - stuff I made from scratch in Procreate - and it flagged three of them as 95% AI. The problem is these tools are trained on art data sets that don't separate human digital work from actual AI output. My advice is if you're posting art online, save your layered files or time-lapse videos as proof. That's the only thing that'll save you if one of these broken detectors comes knocking.