Is that code... on the back of the monitor?
...and the back of the chair behind her? Or is that a giant ipad she's sitting on?
hahaha...
If you're gonna use an AI image, come onnn... make an effort at least that it's not completely weird and crazy.
It takes literally seconds to generate these images and this was the best you could pick?
Surely an CEO's wet dream.
There will always be a bias towards some default settings in whatever popular tool, because people who aren't very discerning or dedicated will just punch in a few common ideas into the tool and take the first thing that looks good enough to them.
But people on the outside will continue to have an instinctive sense for these default style biases and be able to tell pretty well that an image was produced that way.
The escape hatch will be what amounts to AI stock photo industry, where practiced "AI Art" designers prepare images that are more subtle and unique and sell them pretty cheaply.
The technology surely can be pushed to the point where a well-crafted image is virtually indistinguishable, but most people are going to just drop "anxious woman at keyboard" or "happy dog with a ball" and there's only so much unique information contained in those prompts so defaults will always reign.
How is that different from the established practice of using stock photos?
I didn’t heavily scrutinize it. But without the additional context seen on a desktop it’s not that remarkable.
So that’s all I thought it was. A generic stock image. So I didn’t pay any real attention to it because it was “just” a stock image.
I agree with you. It was totally unnecessary.
If you do something poorly, it reflects poorly on the results. If it becomes endemic to do something cheaply and poorly, people will think that method is indicative of cheapness and laziness. It doesn't negate that it may be possible to do it well, but you can't just chide everyone for seeing the trend and reacting to it.