[jacobgkau]

> That isn't an AI image.

What's your source for that assertion? The image has AI-isms and is suspiciously similar to a much less AI-looking image that someone else in the thread linked to in a PDF regarding the research. You can say it looks like a human could've done it, but that's not any less "winning an argument in your own head" unless you've got evidence of what human drew that image.

[astrange]

I don't see any AI-isms. The most common one would be that parts of the image tend to be conceptually unclear or blend together, but these are recognizable objects composited into one image.

At most the bubbles could be, but I think they're just stock art.

[jerf]

The ocean having two distinct surfaces, one distinctly below another, is such an AI-ism that I don't think I've ever in my life seen it in human-generated art.

You need to tune your detectors.

[astrange]

Like I said, I'm pretty sure I've seen that exact thing in a subway ad before AI image generation was invented.