this post was submitted on 20 Jul 2026
361 points (98.9% liked)

Technology

87550 readers
3003 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] Denixen@feddit.nu 6 points 1 month ago (4 children)

I have used crowd collected data for research. You have to curate each picture carefully and cannot trust labels, there are many erroneous identifications.

Maybe if you have access to pre-curated you can trust it a bit, but if you are a researcher and use images from these websites without curation you are already doing it wrong...

AI altered images doesn't change things too much, it probably just increases the numbers of errors that already existed...

[โ€“] fonix232@fedia.io 4 points 1 month ago

I'd argue that AI does change things:

  • on one hand it increases the percentage of invalid/unusable images. A mis-labeled image is still potentially useful, an image of a toucan in the Arctic isn't. This means that even large datasets become largely unusable because of the volume of fake images.
  • on the other hand any AI picture that slips through, taints the dataset and results in expensive manual cleanup to ensure data is reliable.
load more comments (3 replies)