Jess Weatherbed

I think that was pretty much Google's entire kind of ad campaign for this to the point where they've called their latest tool Reimagine. Like it's meant to be a creativity thing. People don't always have good imagination intentions. And yeah, describing that to an actual human being is going to be uncomfortable or potentially illegal in some cases. Those barriers are just completely removed.

AI, again, has no qualms about whether you should be asking it to make something. It's just going to do it.

AI, again, has no qualms about whether you should be asking it to make something. It's just going to do it.

AI, again, has no qualms about whether you should be asking it to make something. It's just going to do it.

I think so. I think the barrier for who was being convinced by this stuff before was there was still a good chunk of people that would see something within a split second and just automatically assume that, yeah, it's accurate without actually looking at the fact that they've got, I don't know, eight fingers on each hand or something, even in the early days of image generation.

I think so. I think the barrier for who was being convinced by this stuff before was there was still a good chunk of people that would see something within a split second and just automatically assume that, yeah, it's accurate without actually looking at the fact that they've got, I don't know, eight fingers on each hand or something, even in the early days of image generation.

I think so. I think the barrier for who was being convinced by this stuff before was there was still a good chunk of people that would see something within a split second and just automatically assume that, yeah, it's accurate without actually looking at the fact that they've got, I don't know, eight fingers on each hand or something, even in the early days of image generation.

But the improvement to the general technology has definitely exacerbated it. And I think there is also an error of people will just believe something with a narrative if it works for them anyway. Yeah. they don't actually need that much substantive evidence towards it.

But the improvement to the general technology has definitely exacerbated it. And I think there is also an error of people will just believe something with a narrative if it works for them anyway. Yeah. they don't actually need that much substantive evidence towards it.

But the improvement to the general technology has definitely exacerbated it. And I think there is also an error of people will just believe something with a narrative if it works for them anyway. Yeah. they don't actually need that much substantive evidence towards it.

If it's somewhere aligned on a position that they already have and they can use that as an illustrative guide, they're just going to run with it. So I do think it's making things considerably worse now that it's convincing the people that used to actually try and keep an eye out for obvious fakes. But yeah, it's definitely exacerbating the issue considerably.

If it's somewhere aligned on a position that they already have and they can use that as an illustrative guide, they're just going to run with it. So I do think it's making things considerably worse now that it's convincing the people that used to actually try and keep an eye out for obvious fakes. But yeah, it's definitely exacerbating the issue considerably.

If it's somewhere aligned on a position that they already have and they can use that as an illustrative guide, they're just going to run with it. So I do think it's making things considerably worse now that it's convincing the people that used to actually try and keep an eye out for obvious fakes. But yeah, it's definitely exacerbating the issue considerably.

No, not at all. I think the Photoshop argument itself almost feels outdated already because it's become synonymous with the act of image editing in general. But the actual software itself was a barrier that hasn't really existed for a little while now since we've started having filtering apps and Facetune and stuff on our mobile phones. What it did was create a real societal problem.

No, not at all. I think the Photoshop argument itself almost feels outdated already because it's become synonymous with the act of image editing in general. But the actual software itself was a barrier that hasn't really existed for a little while now since we've started having filtering apps and Facetune and stuff on our mobile phones. What it did was create a real societal problem.

No, not at all. I think the Photoshop argument itself almost feels outdated already because it's become synonymous with the act of image editing in general. But the actual software itself was a barrier that hasn't really existed for a little while now since we've started having filtering apps and Facetune and stuff on our mobile phones. What it did was create a real societal problem.

As soon as we had Photoshop introduced, there became this idea that we need to be chasing perfection in everything that we do. And that was pushed in marketing images and that was like negatively impacting body image and stuff. But it was also this idea that a picture should be perfect.

As soon as we had Photoshop introduced, there became this idea that we need to be chasing perfection in everything that we do. And that was pushed in marketing images and that was like negatively impacting body image and stuff. But it was also this idea that a picture should be perfect.

As soon as we had Photoshop introduced, there became this idea that we need to be chasing perfection in everything that we do. And that was pushed in marketing images and that was like negatively impacting body image and stuff. But it was also this idea that a picture should be perfect.

And you should maybe feel bad if it's not or that you're less if you're not able to take stunning images like that. And ever since we've had these filtering applications, which were incredibly limited, you could make yourself have smoother skin, maybe slimmer jawline. They weren't massive changes.