AI poster wins Ohio State Fair contest

Post by ButlerianJihad » Mon, Aug 03, 2026, 2:39 PM UTC

userbinator wrote: post #147

ButlerianJihad wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No they didn’t—from TFA: When the poster contest was originally formed in 2024, the use of AI was permitted if explained as a part of the application process. Since current US legal decisions indicate that genAI works are not copyrightable, this is troublesome for any organization that wants exclusive licensing for publicity. The State Fair would expect to incorporate their art winners into marketing, posters, and ex…

Not to mention that any Ai-entrant piece could be duplicated by any other entrant With great difficulty, maybe. You'd need the exact model, prompt, seed, and hardware, and even then I believe there is some nondeterminism.

Post by boogieknite » Mon, Aug 03, 2026, 3:58 PM UTC

_kulang wrote: post #11

annzabelle wrote: post #4

My workplace did a sweepstakes for the world cup and there were bonus prizes for decorating your desk. All three winners had simply uploaded photos of their desks to an AI image generator and had it add flags etc to decorate and submitted that. One person used AI to make it look like he was wearing the jersey of his assigned team. The person running the contest wrote up something about how impressed she was with the…

For whatever reason, the photo is point. People are only doing it for the photo and only doing the photo for the competition. I agree that we lost something, I just also think a majority of people don’t know what’s missing: they just put effort to make the photo, rather than to make the desk

Post by xboxnolifes » Mon, Aug 03, 2026, 5:43 PM UTC

RugnirViking wrote: post #166

xboxnolifes wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I agree with your main point, I'm not sure what the article has to do with it. It's sounds more like a poll on how much debt or bills the responder currently has to deal with.

the post I was replying to boiled down people's decisions as "What is the risk of getting caught and is it worth risking?" I was linking it to mention that many (most?) people's mental model of risk is extremely conservative. They would forego an expected value 10x reward just for predictability/certainty. Similarly, I believe people weigh the "risk of getting caught" extremely highly in their heads. Far higher than…

Post by CuriouslyC » Mon, Aug 03, 2026, 7:36 PM UTC

apical_dendrite wrote: post #184

CuriouslyC wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ironic plot twist, AI is just exposing your coworker's weakness. They could slow down and understand before blasting away at code, or explicitly hang back and generate tech demos/PoCs for architectural choices while building understanding, but they didn't. The only reason things were ok before was because they were handicapped to a speed slower than their ability to figure things out.

Is it a weakness of the individual or is it a systemic issue where management sees how fast a single task can be "completed" with AI so they set goals that can only be achieved if you offload everything to AI and then fall into the trap I described above.

Post by internet2000 » Tue, Aug 04, 2026, 2:22 AM UTC

happytoexplain wrote: post #124

internet2000 wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A parallel I like to draw is Thomas Kinkade and HDR photography. This style has always been popular, even pre-AI.

Analogies are lazy rhetorical devices. Different things are, unsurprisingly, different. Saying "X is like Y" does nothing but invite the conversation to take a turn into identifying all the differences between X and Y. Just defend the original subject on its own merits.