R AI NBOLT

@@manjilmanjil3003is he cooking??!!!🗣🗣🗣🗣🔥🔥🔥

pin pls

1.9k likes and 4 replys? -lemme change that- changed.

Rainbot

You must be new around here 😂

The Polish are important in geoguesser. Especially our trees.

@@harstar12345 yep I am 💀

At 7:50 he was talking about the 2nd image and at 8:04 he was talking about the 4th image. Thats why theres always a red arrow that shows what picture hes talking about

@@FaeTheMf poles are used constantly to determine where you are. A lot of places look very, very similar so you see a certain pole you might be able to eliminate somewhere or know which country, or province you're in by that alone or with other clues

They look like they're floating in midair

AI foliage is really obvious, i looked at the trees of each round and had 100% win rate, got all of them correct, even identified the double AI round

@@petrkdn8224 I'd assume that it because foliage being correct relies on the complex 3D structure of the trees being correct, that with branches often being obscured, hidden by bloom, blending with background or getting messed up by image compression due to them being too small. And sometimes you need to get details which are not represented by anything in the image, like wind direction right That and AI does fine texture worse when it's not the focus.

@@petrkdn8224 Yeah any sort of pattern generally throws the AI off. With trees and leaves however, you just need to ask yourself; what’s the logic being that branch and where is it coming from? It usually ends up looking like how fever dreams feel. In this case tho, I couldn’t see anything through my phone screen. Couldn’t see the details in a thumbnail resolution.

Yea I agree with previous replies. AI is terrible at leaves and other coordinated or semi coordinated structures (like candles, fires, lights and shadows) Branches out in the open wind will all lean towards the same direction under the effect of the sun and the wind. Individual leaves will always face the direction that gives them most sunlight, top leaves usually face east while bottom leaves face any opening to the sky they can find. A pile of big leafed plants is always enough to thwart any AI.

for me, the difficult part about looking for shadows and distortions is that its hard to tell if its due to the camera/blurring or if its an ai mistake

Personally I could tell because it felt off and looking a bit longer I noticed some details thats seemed weird But crazy that this gut feeling can tell that something is off

It was pretty obvious, stuff like the distorted piles of dirt and oddly formed tree branches gave it away for the first one​@@thegreendude2086

exactly my thought, last round picture 3 the shadow of the tree was way too on point to be AI, didn't need to see anything else.

yeah for example in the first quiz.. number 3 looks totally off for me.. it looks like they put together bushy greens, too clean accentuated road with too maintained side of the road for that part of the world, and the background sky pops way too much.. but for him it "made sense" somehow..

That's the effect that AI images give. Once you start questioning reality, everything looks fake.

Yeah whoever picked the real images did a great job at that, it's very intentional.

This kinda reminded me of that one game, exit 8 I believe. Where mind starts playing tricks on you and just start overthinking way too much so that even the most normal things start feeling like they dont belong there

Google Streetview does have a lot of weird distortion and such that looks AI generated because it kind of is, with the way 360 views are spliced.

At some point AI becomes realistic enough that even just slightly weird real pictures blur the line with good AI.

messed up the last like 20 sec on the export, sorry! 4/13 chose 4 was AI (31%) 7/13 chose 1 was AI (54%) 2/13 chose 2 was AI (15%)

Thank you so much!

@@georainboltthe abrupt ending makes a lot more sense now

@@georainboltLETS GO🐗

did anyone get perfect on all of them?@@georainbolt

Underrated comment

Don't give google any ideas, please. It's hard the way it is already hahaha

You have to get it wrong to prove you are a human.

Yeah it's horrifying. Objectivity is gonna vanish

That's the issue with Deceptive Imagery: You caption it enough, just make it "look real", and people are going to believe it.

I went 5/5 but not for the reason of knowing its AI like him I just found distinctive color grading differences between real cameras and FOV it feels like art more than an actual picture its scary how accurate some were tho.

@@ABC-lm9do Yeah, that's another scary thing. When you have to be an expert in a relevant field to have much of a chance when you *know* something AI is present, pretty much no one will have any hope spotting these things in the wild. And it's only gonna get better, with video and eventually synced audio (by eventually I mean like 2 or 3 years tops) that to most people will appear completely seamless.

I went 5/5, I'm not a geoguessr pro, I'm not an expert in any relative field at all, AI just looks uncanny to any human being with functioning eyes(no, I wasn't just guessing)

Or maybe a trick question where all of them are real

d”A” n”I”nja

Let him cook

I know nothing but I imagine you could use tools like how there is software that can be used to detect if a picture has been photoshopped

@@lpharmer3496 At that point it just becomes an arms race so those also won't hold forever.

@@cameron7374 true. Better ai image detection = better ai images until maybe an AI image can be created that is indistinguishable from a real image

@@lpharmer3496 Thing is, the human brain has vastly more neurons than our image generating AI right now. Them having fewer neurons fundamentally limits their maximum performance even if you train them in a loop like that, i.e. they just don't have the brainpower. Normal adversarial networks like you describe are equal in network size and so they eventually are able to fool the discriminator (the other AI checking if the output is real or fake), but if the discriminator (a human in this case) is much bigger, it may not ever get higher than a certain success rate. True human/superhuman performance might be a long way off (until we can make much bigger neural networks).

​@@lpharmer3496Ai is often trained by using that tech, back and forth, informing itself with a pass/fail nonstop several thousand times a second.

pause the video.

Someone teach bro how to pause a video 😭 🙏

I doubt this was the intention of the editor, but flashes of text probably help the algorithm because viewers either need to pause or rewind to read it, which increases the watch time per click.

people who are saying pause the video are missing the point 😂

​@@shmooveyea It was on for such a short time that I literally couldn't even pause it in time. If I have to rewind just to not miss kind of important information, it sucks :/

Google lens

I actually knew this one! If you do rock climbing in UK, it's pretty easy. And something about that rock by the parking also screams UK to me idk why lol but yeah, does not look like UK to a normal person, sky too blue lmao

​@@Pavel-yp2je Can you confirm my theory that rock is there to stop cars from pulling out at an angle and prevent crashes with cars coming around the corner?

@@ArthurB26 can't confirm but wouldn't be surprised if that's the case

I love her! Amazing drag queen lol

Same

E‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎

For now

wait until There are AI that can detect AI photo

AI won’t replace you, a person who uses AI will.

🧑‍🏭

he cut right after, so probably did say noggin and then deleted it

And it will also only become more difficult. (Saying this as an artist)

it was easy not that long ago, the technology is moving faster than people can update the information in their brains about said technology

"And then people come with all the technical knowledge about design/art/photography" so for some people it is easy?

@@anikinmartinez4726 even with the knowledge its not given some of the scores the pros got

It's still pretty easy most of the time

Your so damn smart

For round 2 no roads towards the houses

oh yeah the shadows under the trees were suspiciously darker than they should be good eye

I can't see what ur talking about at all :(

@@colecube8251top left pic on the last challenge, above where the road ends you can see the sky between the trees on the left and right side of the road there is a horizontal line

@@colecube8251 Look at the top-left image, dead center but on the right edge - there's like a "bone" shape in a branch. Directly to its side, there's an identical copy of that bone shape. If you look closelier, you'll notice that there's an entire smear of clone/copy of that whole area, which is pretty common in panoramic imaging when it's stitching images together. Essentially the whole right edge (like the last 30 columns or so) are just copied from directly to the left of it.

@@colecube8251 i.imgur.com/7Q8C0yt.png here's a little diagram of what I mean

@@colecube8251 i.imgur.com / 7Q8C0yt.png - here's a visual explanation of what I mean

If you put enough effort into it, it would be impossible to tell them apart. Any "glitches" you may see in AI might be from camera blur. There is just so, so, so much data out there when it comes to nature.

No, those are not gaps. Those are leaves in front of the trunks.

Clear giveaway on number 2 as well. The snow one. The poles don't have wires. The electric wires are hanging mid air

I'd guess middle. He got a dude that does ai and a geoguesser pro.

@@Speed001 Now, this is the bottom. This AI stuff has barely been out for a few years. It is nowhere near to completion or to its full potential.

Might not actually be the bottom

​@@luka188it's full potential is based on what information we use to train it, most ai already are trained billions if not trillions of input, I doubt we can get more than that tbh, for now the big difference is how well you can train the ai and how much of its potential we can get out

@@luka188it hasn't been for "a few years", it has been literally decades of research and development at this point. It's been only "a few years" since AI image generation got commercially viable, which for many products is close to the final form (though not for AI of course), but still it definitely isn't "bottom".

Lmao😂😂 Edit: Helped with your goal

@@ubermensch9741 Thanks mate😊

haha

Same, but I thought the road was onto of the rightside foiliage. The gap between road and plants was missing to me

im gonna touch u

100 likes and no comment let me fix it

@@himanshucubing7541 Corny asf

i dont even know how to determine dynamic range and exposure in a picture. All I know that tho9se are important factors for a high quality image. As a layman im not able to identify that in an image. " it is safe to assume they wouldn't have 12-18 stops of dynamic range but rather less than 10" You cannot expect me to know this kind of information. What you are saying is, that it is easy for an expert or photography entusiast to spot the AI image assuming they know what to look out for.

was playing along myself and only guessed pic 1 of the last set incorrectly without any geoguesser knowledge, knowing what ai likes to do really helps you spot things that are likely generated

Yeah I think Geoguessr knowledge only takes you so far on something like this. I've worked with a fair bit of AI generation and while I've barely played the game I only missed the round 5 while watching on a small tablet. It's going to get harder and harder in the coming months and years though to pick up on the small things that don't really pass the smell test as its getting so much more right than wrong compared to even 12 months ago.

@@Consumpter the last one was the only one I got wrong, that's why I didn't say it works every time, cuz it doesn't

@@unorevers7160 I'll try to explain better. Exposure is literally how bright the photo is, it is measured in stops, that isn't very important info for a non-enthusiast. What you need to know is that the fact that on the same image a camera captured high detail and great color in both the shadows and in the highlights is the sign of high dynamic range (generally cameras can either expose for the shadows and likely get a fully white sky or expose for the highlights and get fully black shadows), while in a forest on a sunny day with the sky perfectly visible and full detail in the shadows of the forest without any noise (literal multicolored grain in the image, common in low light, high ISO causes it - not important rn), if you have such high dynamic range it is very likely that the photo is AI generated cuz google street view cameras aren't that good, don't get me wrong, they can get perfect exposure in most conditions but when you have both very dark and very light area in the same it is likely to expose for one of them since it cannot get high detail in both, hence a lower dynamic range. The number of stops of dynamic range is the difference in exposure measured in stops between the darkest and lightest area in a given photo, it isn't important how that's measured, what you need to know is: Human eye: 18-21 stops, Hollywood level cinema camera: 13-16 stops, Pro DSLR: 10-13 stops max, phone: 7-12 stops, old camcorder: 5-9 stops and crucially google street view gen3,4 is probably 9-13 stops. AI is likely to go for like 16 stops at least so it's obvious if the example is easy as I stated previously, detail in both very dark and in very light areas of the image at the same time on a sunny day would likely, but not 100%, indicate an AI gen image.

well its not as impressive considering you were also istening to his thought process but yeah pretty good all things considered.

A lot of times it's just paying attention to things you wouldn't, like tree branches not floating in air lol

@@crazydragy4233 to be fair that could easily happen due to how streetview stitches images imperfectly, disconnecting a branch from the tree.

@@forasago I don't think AI generated foliage (which follows no logic outside of green bubble here) and visible stitching looks the same tbh,