Post #3247584
2025-10-06 13:35 UTC
@tomw@mastodon.social @geospacedman@mastodon.social People can do good imagery (hand drawing, mermaid, plantuml, any gis for maps, etc) but are also some who can’t.
There are different reasons why somebody uses AI for imagery - either they can’t (not their fault - if they have enough resources, they pay somebody), they do not have the time nor resources to pay anybody, they do not see them as essential in their presentation, etc. They also might not care.
But it is not a “signifier” but rather indicative and not proven.
So if you think the science is good, then you should be able to sit through it and listen (remember these overhead slides shows with text typed on them?).
Replies (1)
-
@tomw@mastodon.social 2025-10-06 13:46
@RMKrug@hachyderm.io @geospacedman@mastodon.social An incredibly lo-fi image can still be made with care. Someone's questionable colour choices on a map don't necessarily take away from their message. But using AI shows such a lack of thought, such a lack of care, that it is overwhelmingly likely that the "science" is sloppy or BS. You can say it's not proven, as if we have to hold aesthetic critiques to some burden of proof, but it hasn't steered me wrong yet.