• BoosBeau@lemmy.world
    1·
    38 minutes ago

    I get people are arguing about fake/AI, but… KMART is still alive and kicking? I thought they died off like Radio Shack and Blockbuster.

      • DillDough@lemmy.zip
        1·
        40 minutes ago

        Department stores do carry sex toys. Obviously not Kmart since that hasn’t been a thing in like 20 years but Target and such places do have them on the shelves.

    • [deleted]@piefed.worldEnglish
      60·
      18 hours ago

      Nobody thinks this is a real image in a Kmart. They just dispute whether the obviously fake image was photoshopped or generated by AI.

      The butt plug image used is AI but also from the company that sells them: https://craverise.com/products/stainless-steel-hidden-key-box-butt-plug

      That does not mean that putting the AI image in that context for humorous purposes was done in AI.

      It is also trivial to strip watermarks so checking for watermarks isn’t reliable. Not all gen AI images are even created with watermarks. It’s like checking an optional note from a parent.

      We should just call stuff fake if that is what matters. Whether it is gen AI or photoshop is far less important than being fake.

      • TrackinDaKraken@lemmy.worldEnglish
        9·
        17 hours ago

        So, the image is fake, but the product exists. Also, Kmart does sell a few sex toys. So, the only lie here is that Kmart sells this particular sex toy, as it does not.

        • Monument@piefed.worldEnglish
          3·
          16 hours ago

          Many years ago, before Walgreens started selling sex toys in store, I bought a hitachi magic wand from them. (This was before their mainstream adoption as a sex toy, and they were not labeled as such on their site. They were significantly cheaper there than at places selling them as sex toys.)

          But to your point - many believable lies contain plausible truths.

    • Snot Flickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
      9·
      14 hours ago

      The first clue was Kmart honestly.

      Also pretty sure it’s a non-standard logo for Kmart too.

      There’s other details but that was a major one for me.

      You know, on top of the idea of this somehow getting sold in a box store which is silly enough to begin with.

  • Snapz@lemmy.world
    31·
    17 hours ago

    She jingles loudly while she dances,

    Leading oft to pantsless romances.

    Careful early planning, she stays worry free,

    As her bottom always holds the key.

    You’re welcome.

  • Fizz@lemmy.nz
    59·
    21 hours ago

    Please do not put anything from Kmart inside you. It will almost certainly break

    • expatriado@lemmy.world
      22·
      21 hours ago

      there are 3 left i the US and 300 in Australia. Other stores that disappeared from my city but still exists somewhere else: Radio Shack, Blockbuster, Winn Dixie, Bi-Lo…would definitely do nostalgia stop if close to one of these

      • naught101@lemmy.world
        4·
        11 hours ago

        Huh… This comment sent me down a Wikipedia rabbit hole. Australian Kmart is a separate company and brand from the American one. We also had a Bi-Lo until maybe 15 years ago that was also unrelated.

        We had RadioShack and Blockbuster too, but they were the same brand.

      • db2@lemmy.world
        3·
        19 hours ago

        Leakage and opening from motion, terrible idea to actually wear. Decent deterrent laying around though especially if you’ve got any artistic skill to make it look used.

        • protist@retrofed.comEnglish
          1·
          18 hours ago

          Assuming the construction is decent, this looks perfectly fine to me. Really depends on how well machined those threads are

        • DarthFreyr@lemmy.world
          14·
          20 hours ago

          That just looks like typical camera and compression artifacts on a fine detail pattern, not like a generative AI that doesn’t actually know what it’s drawing so it starts making inaccurate extrapolations? What about that makes you think it was done by AI?

          • nialv7@lemmy.world
            2·
            19 hours ago

            It’s the typical artifact created by AI when drawing multiple parallel lines, it’s immediately noticeable to me. This doesn’t look at all like image compression artifacts to me if that’s what you are saying.

            Otherwise I would say this image is flawless, wouldn’t be able to tell.

            • DarthFreyr@lemmy.world
              6·
              18 hours ago

              Can you specifically describe what you are seeing then that stands out as an AI artifact? I am genuinely interested, not just try to challenge your statement. Here’s my observations and thoughts on it:

              What I see is the JPEG compression blocks around the lines and characters where the chunk changes from a smooth color to a much noisier square; what looks to have once been much blockier aliased pixels forming the barcode lines that got scaled up and blurred, so now there are distinct vertical segments a within each line, as well as a noticeable gridding on the small characters (some of which might also be my viewer); and then possibly some sort of moire effect from the slightly angled barcode lines interacting with the grid of the pixels and/or JPEG compression chunk boundaries. As with many images on the internet, it looks like it has changed size and format in the past, and it’s possible that someone composting an image from different sources would end up with different artifacting in different places.

              Given how small the details of the barcode are, I think they would have to come pretty much entirely from the VAE decoding itself, not from the typical generative AI denoising that we would typically associate with hallucinations, extra fingers, and all the other “classic” tells of older image generation models as well as the less-specific “wrongness” of some more recent ones. So it would AFAIK end up having to be a pretty specific artifact to the actual base model being used, and even then just doing a VAE encoding into the compressed, many-dimensional latent-space and immediately decoding would produce the same artifact, and that’s hardly an “AI” process on its own.

              • redjard@reddthat.com
                1·
                7 hours ago

                First, @nialv7@lemmy.world was right, the background by itself without the box has a synthid, I commented some screenshots below.

                I also see those “ai artifacts” on the barcode, though I wasn’t as sure about it before seeing the synthid.
                I can make out that the lines don’t run quite parallel but form these V and Λ shapes, closer together on one end and merging together.
                Counting the left most blurry line as one, the 5th is leaning into the 4th line at the top for example. The compression is strong and the image doesn’t have enough resolution to make it out very clearly, but it still looks like an actual detail not a compression artifact to me. The lines are all a bit wonky, more than the noise could do.

                Here’s a way more obvious example:

                This has some other artifacts too that I don’t see in the post, but you can see the general wonkiness. And also how some lines have “bled” together, though this isn’t a great example of that.

        • nialv7@lemmy.world
          2·
          19 hours ago

          Lol it even has OpenAI’s watermark…

          I know gloating is bad but like, I told you so, feel dumb now?