I don’t know Jay, let’s ask A.I…
What on earth?? Gemini is reading private messages?? 
6 Likes
Well now, kinda feel like AI has put me in my place.
Thanks, that stung. At least you didn’t ask who Heyzeus was.
3 Likes
That was not my intent… I thought it would ask who johnfcooley was. It’s crazy though isn’t it? It had you in it’s training data? How is it accessing private messages??
1 Like
That’s a good question for BL’s forum bros. Lot shocking. Kinda think “who is johnfcooley” should be the obvious answer if you ask anyone.
Heh, just shows how dumb AI really is
2 Likes
Turtles all the way down… 
2 Likes
I mean, it’s not that hard to fool an AI… or let it fool itself for that matter. Apparently, my Cathedral Design Contest entry is not a 3D model but an actual antique.
Aka, “I’m sorry Dave, I’m afraid I can’t do that”
Okay, I’ll take half the blame, seeing how I did go over the rather plastic-y looking thing with an airbrush…but what I wanna know is, how can I sell this for the “antique price” to Google’s AI, so that I can go and get myself an H2D.
2 Likes
Ok, crazy theory.. since I pay for the Google plan that includes Gemini they wedge it in my Gmail, Chrome and every other Google service. Do you think since I had this forum open in one tab and Gemini open in the other it assumed the context of this forum? Like when I watch a Youtube video about something and then my news feed is full of it. Just a theory..
3 Likes
Maybe, could have been a notification email.
It could be I’m being watched. Been somewhat vocal here and there on SM. Something about the great pumpkin having come early and we need Gallagher and his hammer…
There is a local network called “definitely not the FBI” nearby.
2 Likes
No just A.I. … in my opinion also rendered images. Sure they look more like the real object but aren’t the physical object.
1 Like
I agree, the subject was about AI, thus my comment was related to the subject.
My view is, any image provide where any forms of AI, manipulation or fabrication have occurred, those should not occupy the first image (known as the hero or poster) and any use of such must be clearly stated on the image itself in a way it is unavoidable for any user to be unaware. Additionally, the description should include a statement of any image that are not direct photo or direct photos with overlayed captions.
5 Likes
For those who use Photoshop, sometimes it produces better results than AI. Should we exclude clickbait titles? I believe the user should decide what to print, regardless of the cover image. The only real requirement should be to show at least one photo of the actual print. Then the final user decides whether the file has value. After the download, the quality of a print is clear. As Mahatma Gandhi said: ‘The value of a thing is what people are willing to give it’.
2 Likes
This is already against the guidelines. Point 3 of the model guidelines states “Using misleading phrases such as “Best, Top, Official” in model or print listing”.
Although, Point 7 states “When uploading models or posts that generated by AI, please ensure that you clearly identify and flag the AI generated content.”. So not really sure that the guidelines mean anything.
I get it. But the fact of life is that most people only look at the cover photo.
1 Like
Well yeah if you’re touching up your model and misrepresenting it. If all you’re doing is adding bg and shadows then no. IE use the model in the pic not retouched. Retouched (the model in the image) is no different in my opinion.
Just how do they decide? The vibes, psychic connection? I don’t know if something was lost in translation here but the pictures of the print are exactly how they decide what to print. It’s the no.1 reason AI images for prints are happening. No. 2 is a pretty AI picture and ■■■■ file.
Yes, and if they try to rate as such usually those ratings are removed by the poster.
Ghandi didn’t say that. It is John Naisbitt who stated that “Value is what people are willing to pay for it.” among others, but not Ghandi. Gandhi preached “Truth is God”. One can say then that posting real images would be closer to what Ghandi has said.
3 Likes
I absolutely owe you an apology for the quote mistake! You are 100% right. That value-on-the-market thing was an idea reflecting Adam Smith, the economist, not the Mahatma. Gandhi focused on Truth and ethics, not price and greed.
Your point is crucial: people are not stupid!
They don’t need a degree to spot the rip-off. If the presentation photo is amazing and the actual print is lame, the user knows they’ve been misled.
This isn’t just about a bad deal; it’s a huge loss of trust. The creator’s reputation gets crushed. I hope they keep doing this because, as you said, it’s a kind of natural market cleansing that will get rid of the dishonest ones.
And to quote someone who understood consumers very well:
“The consumer is not a moron; she’s your wife.” — David Ogilvy
It’s a blunt way of saying: never underestimate the judgment of the person buying your product. Coherence is everything.
1 Like
Spot on with most of it, but to this, I must agree to disagree
bellcurve.png
1 Like
no, I’m hoping we all know what one of those is
edit: and if not; it goes as further evidence for my conjecture 
2 Likes
Respectfully I disagree that people aren’t stupid. The are easily dupped and I prefer to stay away from them. Manipulating the masses is easy, just tell them what they want to hear, doesn’t matter if it’s true. I have plenty of current examples.
Moving on, look at the amount of downloads each one of those manipulative AI or, ahem, Photoshopped, models have in downloads. Now you can see how it works.
No, no it doesn’t. This is a flash forward sort of thing. MakerWorld isn’t selling pots and pans or odd red hats, it’s just a file. A file they will print (which may bring them some sort of joy, similar to anti-depresent} and move on. EVEN if they rate it poorly, it’s not that hard to remove a bad rating.
My wife is incredibly smart. I can prove it. Not that she married me, that’s the opposite, but when she’s on MW searching for a print she avoids pretty pictures and ones with a ■■■■ load of downloads but one rating. She looks for the little guy.
She has too, she’s on my account right now.
Back to that quote though. It’s a blunt way doing nothing. in the 1800’s and 1900’s when things were still made with materials like steel, Iron, glass etc it was important to have quality. When you held it you knew you had spent money on something. Craftsmanship was important. That’s not the case in this day and age, for better of for worse. It also has no bearing (The correct word is “bearing” on a subject.
Bearing on means having relevance or influence.
Example: “That evidence has no bearing on the case.” MY BAD) on this topic.
3 Likes
Speak for yourself.
6 Likes