{"views":["
\"kladda5\"<\/a>
kladda5<\/a> \u2013 198862<\/a><\/small><\/header>

lumberjacck<\/a> ive found https:\/\/hivemoderation.com\/ai-generated-content-detection<\/a> to be the most reliable, but only when its 90+% sure which ai-model was used, if it cant tell which model was used its usually a false positive.<\/p><\/div><\/article>","

\"lumberjacck\"<\/a>
lumberjacck<\/a> \u2013 198863<\/a><\/small><\/header>

kladda5<\/a> Hm. Yes, it seems superior to the others. It's getting harder and harder to tell with your eyes. I don't analyze every detail either especially when photographers upload them.<\/p><\/div><\/article>","

\"lumberjacck\"<\/a>
lumberjacck<\/a> \u2013 198908<\/a><\/small><\/header>

kladda5<\/a> Look at this guy for example. Fake photographer. He even advertises himself as a real pro.\nI fear what will come of art in a few years...<\/p>\n

https:\/\/500px.com\/p\/wangzhangyue?view=photos<\/a><\/p><\/div><\/article>","