all 90 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 61 points 1 month ago (1 child)

Please do not put anything from Kmart inside you. It will almost certainly break

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 35 points 1 month ago* (1 child)

    She jingles loudly while she dances,

    Leading oft to pantsless romances.

    Careful early planning, she stays worry free,

    As her bottom always holds the key.

    You're welcome.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 29 points 1 month ago (3 children)
  • [–] 26 points 1 month ago* (4 children)

    Looks like AI

    Smells like AI, too

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    I don't think you should be putting anything that unscrews like that in your asshole.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • Does it fit a wrist watch?

  • source
  • [–] 28 points 1 month ago (3 children)
  • [–] 23 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

    there are 3 left in the US and 300 in Australia. Other stores that disappeared from my city but still exists somewhere else: Radio Shack, Blockbuster, Winn Dixie, Bi-Lo...would definitely do nostalgia stop if close to one of these

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 month ago

    Huh.. This comment sent me down a Wikipedia rabbit hole. Australian Kmart is a separate company and brand from the American one. We also had a Bi-Lo until maybe 15 years ago that was also unrelated.

    We had RadioShack and Blockbuster too, but they were the same brand.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 99 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (14 children)

    We are done. People who can identify an AI image are now the minority and the mass will be fooled and yet choose to be confidently wrong about it.

    If you are curious, read up about ai image watermarking: https://youtu.be/kVXp6UNVPTo

    https://youtu.be/9btDaOcfIMY https://openai.com/index/advancing-content-provenance/ https://openai.com/research/verify/

  • source
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 77 points 1 month ago* (4 children)

    Nobody thinks this is a real image in a Kmart. They just dispute whether the obviously fake image was photoshopped or generated by AI.

    The butt plug image used is AI but also from the company that sells them: https://craverise.com/products/stainless-steel-hidden-key-box-butt-plug

    That does not mean that putting the AI image in that context for humorous purposes was done in AI.

    It is also trivial to strip watermarks so checking for watermarks isn't reliable. Not all gen AI images are even created with watermarks. It's like checking an optional note from a parent.

    We should just call stuff fake if that is what matters. Whether it is gen AI or photoshop is far less important than being fake.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    So, the image is fake, but the product exists. Also, Kmart does sell a few sex toys. So, the only lie here is that Kmart sells this particular sex toy, as it does not.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 8 points 1 month ago

    Many years ago, before Walgreens started selling sex toys in store, I bought a hitachi magic wand from them. (This was before their mainstream adoption as a sex toy, and they were not labeled as such on their site. They were significantly cheaper there than at places selling them as sex toys.)

    But to your point - many believable lies contain plausible truths.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago

    photoshopped or generated by AI

    this is exact what i was saying. i didn't assume anyone thought it was real, but apparently a lot of people thought it was photoshop (which requires skill, practice, time, and effort), when it was really AI (which doesn't). the proof is the fact that the entire image has SynthID, you can block out the product image (which is also AI generated) from the photo and it still has SynthID. someone took one AI image and asked AI to edit it into a photo, it's AI all the way down.

    People are fooled by a genAI image and thought it was created by a human, and when given the facts they choose to denial and continue to be confidently wrong about it. i mean i already know it's difficult for humans to admit that they are wrong, but to see that actually play out in front of my eyes...

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 12 points 1 month ago (5 children)

    It's a butt plug in a department store, of course it's fake.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 month ago (3 children)

    Department stores do carry sex toys. Obviously not Kmart since that hasn't been a thing in like 20 years but Target and such places do have them on the shelves.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago (1 child)

    That's an Australian Kmart, which still exist everywhere here (anko is their house brand). They definitely do not sell sex toys.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 1 month ago

    Huh, did not know that thanks for the info.

    I am surprised the place with 24/7 nitrous delivery draws the line at sex toys in stores but it is also weird for America to be okay with considering the extreme puritanical stance on non-pedo/incest/bestiality sexuality...I wonder if there's a business opportunity for wang shaped nang tanks?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 1 month ago*

    The first clue was Kmart honestly.

    Also pretty sure it's a non-standard logo for Kmart too.

    There's other details but that was a major one for me.

    You know, on top of the idea of this somehow getting sold in a box store which is silly enough to begin with.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 11 points 1 month ago

    Arc Raiders players be like:

  • source
  • [–] 10 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    I get people are arguing about fake/AI, but... KMART is still alive and kicking? I thought they died off like Radio Shack and Blockbuster.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 10 points 1 month ago

    "Ugh... I sat on my keys!"

  • source
  • [–] 8 points 1 month ago

    "Durable metal design"

    "Ideal for home, business or travel"

    They definitely knew

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 1 month ago

    At least you'll always have them with you.

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 1 month ago

    on the shitpost meter, you score 60%

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    It's also a good hide a key. You can bet no one will touch that if they see it laying around.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 11 points 1 month ago
    [–] 5 points 1 month ago

    never lose keys again

    I guess if it pops open then they won't be "lost", but the flared base won't help get them out.

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 1 month ago

    Do not put that up your pooper. It may look like a anal plug, but it separates and that will be a weird hospital visit to the ER.

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 1 month ago

    I would not trust that.

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 1 month ago

    That is a very personal key holder.

  • source
  • [–] 8 points 1 month ago (6 children)

    Where the hell did you find a Kmart?

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 1 month ago (5 children)

    I think it's still fairly common in Australia. And probably a lot nicer than the American version.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 1 month ago (3 children)

    Yeah, I hear they have buttplugs that can hide spare keys.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 month ago

    I don't know, is it any better then the Butt Plug Nug Jug?

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 1 month ago

    If it was in your ass you'd know.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 1 month ago

    They missed the chance to name it unko

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 1 month ago

    "wait a second, just let me get out the keys"

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 1 month ago (27 children)
  • [–] 32 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (25 children)

    Looks more like shop.

    It is a combination of a pic from Kmart and an image from this product shopped in.

    https://craverise.com/products/stainless-steel-hidden-key-box-butt-plug

    Not slop.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 25 child comments
  • [–] -4 points 1 month ago (22 children)

    Look at the barcode on the price label. To me that says AI slop

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 22 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 1 month ago (7 children)

    That just looks like typical camera and compression artifacts on a fine detail pattern, not like a generative AI that doesn't actually know what it's drawing so it starts making inaccurate extrapolations? What about that makes you think it was done by AI?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 1 month ago* (6 children)

    It's the typical artifact created by AI when drawing multiple parallel lines, it's immediately noticeable to me. This doesn't look at all like image compression artifacts to me if that's what you are saying.

    Otherwise I would say this image is flawless, wouldn't be able to tell.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 month ago (3 children)

    Can you specifically describe what you are seeing then that stands out as an AI artifact? I am genuinely interested, not just try to challenge your statement. Here's my observations and thoughts on it:

    What I see is the JPEG compression blocks around the lines and characters where the chunk changes from a smooth color to a much noisier square; what looks to have once been much blockier aliased pixels forming the barcode lines that got scaled up and blurred, so now there are distinct vertical segments a within each line, as well as a noticeable gridding on the small characters (some of which might also be my viewer); and then possibly some sort of moire effect from the slightly angled barcode lines interacting with the grid of the pixels and/or JPEG compression chunk boundaries. As with many images on the internet, it looks like it has changed size and format in the past, and it's possible that someone composting an image from different sources would end up with different artifacting in different places.

    Given how small the details of the barcode are, I think they would have to come pretty much entirely from the VAE decoding itself, not from the typical generative AI denoising that we would typically associate with hallucinations, extra fingers, and all the other "classic" tells of older image generation models as well as the less-specific "wrongness" of some more recent ones. So it would AFAIK end up having to be a pretty specific artifact to the actual base model being used, and even then just doing a VAE encoding into the compressed, many-dimensional latent-space and immediately decoding would produce the same artifact, and that's hardly an "AI" process on its own.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 month ago* (1 child)

    First, @nialv7@lemmy.world was right, the background by itself without the box has a synthid, I commented some screenshots below.

    I also see those "ai artifacts" on the barcode, though I wasn't as sure about it before seeing the synthid.
    I can make out that the lines don't run quite parallel but form these V and Λ shapes, closer together on one end and merging together.
    Counting the left most blurry line as one, the 5th is leaning into the 4th line at the top for example. The compression is strong and the image doesn't have enough resolution to make it out very clearly, but it still looks like an actual detail not a compression artifact to me. The lines are all a bit wonky, more than the noise could do.

    Here's a way more obvious example:

    This has some other artifacts too that I don't see in the post, but you can see the general wonkiness. And also how some lines have "bled" together, though this isn't a great example of that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 month ago

    I saw the watermark stuff, and I'm not contesting any of that, my specific interest is in the fine-detail artifacts. The apparent leaning of some of the bars, eg the 5th and 6th, can 100% be explained by something like a smudge between them; I'd know because I actually drew up some parallel bars in paint.net, rotated and zoomed them, lightened a splotch, and gave it blur to match. Human eyes and brain are pretty good at picking out valid details from degraded images, but you have to remember we're talking about the level of shading of a handful of pixels, it does not take much disturbance at all to create an illusion of non-parallel lines. A hard object hitting the tag there would be enough to damage the barcode printing slightly to create such a lightening as would produce the leaning appearance.

    I'm not saying that an AI didn't draw the barcode, and I'm not even saying that it doesn't have an effect like that because of generative AI imperfections. I'm saying that nothing that I see, or that has been pointed out to me, about the appearance of the barcode provides any indication or suggestion that the image is AI-generated, instead of those being typical results of looking at an image that has been resized and compressed/converted as it travels across the internet. Or to say the quiet part out loud, that those who see "ai artifacts" in the barcode are chasing ghosts, regardless of the actual image creation or the presence of watermarks/fingerprinting.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago

    i don't know what to tell you man. i don't even know what you are trying to say here.

    as for what artifact i am looking for? i can only say the barcode's lines look weird. if you see it you see it, otherwise i don't know how to explain it too you. it's chicken sexing. i've just seen too many AI generated images.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    I'd say it's not by the irregularities on the shelf, ai rarely puts in those off topic details with that much care and irregularity. Unless ai was asked to use an original image as base then impose the product image.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 month ago (12 children)

    Lol it even has OpenAI's watermark...

    I know gloating is bad but like, I told you so, feel dumb now?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 month ago (6 children)

    The plug image portion is literally from the page I linked. Does AI merge images into other images?

    What watermark? What are you using to verify that it is AI, an unreliable AI checking tool?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 month ago (5 children)

    Yes, AI has been able to take reference images for quite a while now.

    And OpenAI generated images have invisible watermarks embedded into them so you can check if it's AI generated definitively. It's not an AI detector. Here: https://openai.com/research/verify/

    It's sad how tech illiterate and yet still confidently wrong people can be.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 month ago (4 children)

    Why would an image have a watermark but not a manifest?

    image

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 month ago* (3 children)

    Could have been altered/stripped after being generated.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    Or, and hear me out, the original image on the buttplug website was AI generated which doesn't mean the combination of putting it on the Kmart box image was AI generated.

    image

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

    If so you can black out the product package and check if there is still a synth id.

    Edit:

    product image

    entire box blacked out

    So no it's the entire thing that is ai generated.
    I don't think it's likely someone ai generated the box from the ai generated product image and ai generated the background but then shopped it in.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

    just because part of it is AI generated, doesn't mean all of it cannot be:

    to be honest i thought it was AI generated, but I didn't expect it to be an ai edit of another ai image! It's AI all the way down! Ain't that fun?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 0 points 1 month ago (4 children)

    Imagine using the hallucination tool to check for hallucinations

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] -5 points 1 month ago* (3 children)

    Honestly sad people can be so wrong and arrogant. Educate yourself a bit: https://youtu.be/9btDaOcfIMY https://youtu.be/kVXp6UNVPTo

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    If you say things like "educate yourself" followed by youtube-links...I mean, on a us-american schoolyard this might be valued as "education", but...well...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 month ago* (1 child)

    information is information, man... does it matter where it comes from?

    are you like "oh, look at me, i am very posh and sophisticated, i only get my top rate handpicked organic non-GMO information from the Encyclopædia Britannica", so something

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago

    Well no one's gonna grab it are they

  • source