Hi this person is claiming to have a friends lost dog, I can't tell if the video is ai or not, the length seems suspicious but I can't tell, I'm old. Thank you all!

I feel weird about the back of Lucky’s coat and the window send to kind of match up with the rainbow type thing, but maybe I’m hyper aware of what MIGHT be AI.

Why I think it might be AI: The style seems similar to the slick, overly-detailed AI style. Plus The Daily Show has a short turn-around from script to execution, so not sure if they'd have time waiting for an actual artist to do a detailed drawing; you'd expect something less maximalist.

This bit is available on YouTube, from the show that aired October 26th, 2026.

I’m seeing too many fingers and weird fingers in this, plus the way the sun hits their hair seems off. The second girl from the right in the green dress seems to have a thumb that becomes a bracelet? Or is a super long thumb. Maybe I’m wrong but it feels off..

I ran it through synthID, and it came back negative — but it still looks very AI to me, I thought maybe it was generated using a non-synthID partner?

I reverse image searched it, and nothing came up. If this was a real place, usually there'd be multiple images of the same location on the internet.

What do you guys think?

Had anyone watched any content from Still.built_ on IG? In all his videos he has the same monotone voice and his expressions look very oddly unhuman to me. The theme of his page is very strong anti immigration rhetoric and something about it just seems off to me. I am Scottish and don't know anyone that speaks in that way. The background settings look strangely superimposed as well.

Saw this post on Instagram while scrolling. The eyes kinda freaked me out when I first saw it, but I'm really bad at recognizing AI and my friend is convinced it's legit.
Help?

I encountered this via Instagram. Whoever designed this needs to be implemented or something.

Im not an expert but it feels to glossy and I cant tell if the "yellowness" of it is aesthetic or because of AI. The rest of the promo material seems real enough mostly being pixel art but something about this makes me suspiscious.

This was just posted on BroadwayWorld for a new Broadway run of that "It's a Wonderful Life" radio play version.

People are saying it's AI, but i don't see any tells. I think it's very heavily photoshopped, but don't think it's AI. The only suspicious thing I possibly see is the tree reflection in the window(?).

Would hate to think a professional Broadway house is using AI for their poster. But then if they're doing such a bare-bones concept on Broadway, who knows?

SynthID says no AI

They give out their layers to people, but I know that too can be generated or they are just tracing. All their art has the piss filter and a lot of their replies are chatgpt coded.

As the title says, my friend is absolutely convinced that this is ai and they say “the lines are weird” but I don’t see it? I love using this picture as a funny reaction but I don’t want to use it anymore if it’s ai.

Admin scenarios (required)

The following questions are meant to show what you would do if you were an admin. There may be more than one reasonable answer. Explain what you would check, what you would do, which part of the conduct policy you believe applies, and whether the player’s punishment history would change your response.

1. A player reports that someone removed part of a build without permission. The accused player says the owner gave them permission, but the owner is offline and the evidence is incomplete. What would you do? How would your response change if the owner later denied giving permission, told the player to stop, and you witnessed the player continue damaging the build?

Answer: I would ask the player who griefed the build in question, to immediately stop as a first warning. If the griefer refuses to stop, I will then ask a second time, clearly emphasising the consequence of a ban. If they continue after the second warning, I would ban them. If they either stopped after the first or second warning, I would ask which build the owner gave them permission to destroy. If they fail to answer, I would /freeze them and wait for the owner to log on to shed light on the permitted build, and either ban the griefer or dismiss the report if the owner gave permission. According to the scenario where no permission was given, after waiting for the owner to come online, the build owner will deny permission, where I would then ban the griefer for modifying others’ builds without explicit permission according to Category 2, No.1 of the Server Conduct Policy.

1. The spam filter blocks a player’s repeated message. They change the spacing and characters to send the same message anyway, then continue after you warn them to stop. What would you do, and how would a confirmed history of the same behavior affect your response?
2. Assuming the worst-case scenario of repeated offensive language, I would provide only 1 warning using /smite to the player, warning them to both stop spamming, and stop using any offensive vocabulary. If the consequence is ignored, and the player continues to spam chat, I would immediately ban them and compare their potential past ban history; according to Category 2, No.3 of the Conduct Policy, the ban duration will last 1 day. If the player had no or minimal past ban history (e.g. 1, at most 2 past related offenses), I would ban them for 1 hour if they spammed offensive or derogatory language.

Answer:

1. During a heated argument, a player says, “I know where you live, and I’m coming for you.” They later say it was a joke, the other player appears genuinely concerned, and no private information was posted. What would you do immediately, and how would you decide which part of the conduct policy applies?

Answer: Category 2, No.4 of the Conduct Policy relating to making earnest threats towards others (and themselves), would initially impose a 24-hour ban for the player. However, the player had both specified (whether true or not) that their comment was a joke, and additionally had not disclosed private information. Therefore, I would first stress to the perpetrator that implying harm to other players or themself, even as a joke, is never okay – regardless, but even more since the message was taken with genuine concern. I would then compare past ban history, and either issue a 24-hour ban with 2 or more previous offences, or a 16-hour ban if no previous history.

1. A player uses an admin-looking nickname and tag. They never directly claim to be staff, but a new player believes they are an admin. What would you do? How would your response change if the player began telling others that they were an admin?

Answer: I would immediately ask the player in question, if they are an admin or not. This direct address will yield an answer that I can systematically prove is true or not. Using /list, I can view the player’s real status, regardless of what they say. If they admit to not being an admin, I see no fit for bannable offenses given truthful admission, and would kindly but firmly ask the player to remove their tag and not attempt to mirror a false authority. On the other hand, if after viewing the player lie about false administration to both a new player and myself, I would immediately ban the player under Category 2, No.6 of the Conduct Policy for 24-hours, for deceiving both a new player, potentially current players and an admin.

1. A player posts a download link and says it is a useful Minecraft tool/mod. Another player reports that it steals passwords, but the report has not been verified. Without opening, downloading, or testing the link yourself, what would you do immediately, and how would you decide whether further action is needed?

Answer: By clicking on the link in-game, a warning will appear asking if I want to proceed going to the website and providing the entire link, which I would inspect. I would check for obvious phishing scams, brand impersonation, questionable names, etc (e.g. https://link.tesltra.info/hDUefh8x). If the link has any sign of malice, I would ban the player for 72 hours with no prior ban history, but would progress this to a permanent ban with more than 1 past infraction according to Category 1, No.5 of the Conduct Policy regarding link posting.

1. You witness a player repeatedly perform an action that causes serious server lag. They say they were testing whether it could crash the server, but they did not report the issue or receive staff permission before testing it. What would you do immediately, what evidence would you preserve, and who would you notify?

Answer: The foremost and primary rule in Category 1 No.1 that attempts at crashing the server would lead me to issuing an immediate permanent ban on the player for a clear violation of the Conduct Policy without explicit permission from at least a Senior Admin. But regardless of testing for a server crash and most likely that express permission for this action would not be granted, an immediate permaban would be the consequence of this. I would preserve evidence by quickly using an .MKV recording (which sustains recording despite a computer crash), to obtain evidence of this lag, and then proceed to ban the individual. I would notify the Discord, including Super Admins, Senior Admins, Devs and Execs, as crashing the server is a detrimental risk to the safety of players and admins. I would finally apologise on behalf of the admin team on the general discussion component of the Discord, and wait for further instructions from higher-ups.

Declaration (required)

Confirm the following statement by answering Yes:

I wrote every answer in this application myself. I did not copy somebody else’s answers or use AI to help write, rewrite, proofread, or improve any part of my application. I understand that using AI, copying answers, or providing false information will result in my application being denied and may result in additional forum sanctions.

Yes, I agree to this declaration.

—————————————

The above is my application to become a Minecraft admin, which was met with extremely harsh criticism and immediate denial for being “undoubtedly ai”

I used no ai in the making of this, and would like some people to help point out the aspects that make this sound as such,

Thank you in advance

(https://forum.tfreedom.org/t/super-admin-application-000x8007045d/1089)

The creator posted an image as proof that it's all hand drawn in the comments, but the animation has the transition style that all the AI animations I've seen has. I suspect that they at least traced over AI. Also factoring in how they somehow have been posting these types of edit animations everyday consistently. Looking over their account, their other edits almost always has an AI generated Belle looking character at the start.

Like I said I've been looking at this several times and I can't see it. My partner seems to think that the face of the guy changes weirdly but I don't know if it does, everything else seems pretty consistent?

Edit: Signs do seem to point towards it being AI

Saw this post on fb. The op claims that they designed it and drew it themselves.

I can’t quite explain it but these ai designed book covers and characters have a running theme of looking vaguely similar (like a mix of manga-ish features and maximising the female and male features like tiny features of fmc and male is hard lines etc.)

The cover also seemes too perfect.
But no one in the comments seemed to agree with me and applauded the op fight against the ai which they are liking and agreeing.

A while ago my brother lost his pet tortoise so we sent a missing notice on the internet and today I got a message saying that someone had found him, I can't tell if it's ai or not, 1st photo is the one I sent on the notice and the second is the one the person sent me

I found this on Pinterest or a similar site a few months ago and want to make it my PC background, however I ran it through a checker and keeps saying 65-100% ai.

I have no idea what the tells are, and to me looks like real brush strokes. I don't want to use a background that has any AI in it so I would appreciate at least some tips on how to tell from a digital drawing?

I saw the malfoid one first, and just now the LotR Balrog scene. The former might have some artifacts but it's a little hard to tell. I didn't see anything glaring with the balrog scene which would indicate it's AI. But at the same time, most of the other images posted previously has that soulless look. So I'm wanting input here to see if they're giving up AI for these two images or if it's still slop.

This person just made a children's coloring book to sell and this is one of the promotional images. shes been known to use AI in the past. however she does make art too.

After closer inspection I'm still unsure. Any weird things could be just artistic imperfections or deliberate choices, like the willow branches which do look off. plus that brush sky can be as well easily generated. On the other hand the castle layout looks solid.

I got two new coloring books by the same publisher. Revline coloring - JDM edition and Modified cars edition. I had ordered four books total (the other two from other places) only for the first two to seem to be AI. I returned those and waited for these ones, hoping for a different outcome. But these seem to have the same signs, just not as strongly. Are they AI?

Specific reasons I think it might be AI: weird, cropped text. Like on the Lancer, the word Mitsubishi is fine, but the text under it is jumbled. Then, on most cars with more complex badges (Nissan, Honda, ect) the badges are almost right sometimes, and other times weird and unrecognizable. I thought it might be because of copyright, but none of it is consistent. The other books I had, the cars headlights were weird and swirly with no real purpose, but I dont really see that in these as much.