“Photos Don’t Even Have To Be That Realistic”: Boomers On Facebook Are Getting Fooled By AI
Wanna see something scary?
A post on X has been wandering the internetscapes recently, showcasing the power of AI on social media. Specifically how the older generations while scrolling on Facebook are met with AI-generated images, but don’t seem to notice that it’s actually AI. Actually, they don’t seem to notice even if it’s blatantly marked as such.
More Info: X
The rise of AI tech has definitely brought up some challenges for regular internet users due to its power of being so darned believable
Image credits: Pavel Danilyuk / Pexels (not the actual photo)
So much, in fact, that older generations seem to not even be noticing how their feeds are hijacked by AI, as pointed out by this AI investment partner
Image credits: venturetwins
Justine Moore posted an X thread pointing out how elderly people seem to be not noticing the fact that they’re engaging with AI content
Image credits: venturetwins
Image credits: venturetwins
Image credits: venturetwins
Recently, AI investment partner Justine Moore recently took to X (formerly Twitter, but you probably already know that by now) to show a bit of a mind-truck all things considered.
Her post thread includes AI-generated pictures that were posted on Facebook along with screencaps of the comment section. In said comment section, we see a bunch of elderly people praising how beautiful, stunning or cute the pictures are without seemingly understanding that all of these are AI-generated.
“Facebook has turned into an endless scroll of AI photos and the older gens don’t appear to have noticed,” noted Justine in her first post. This was followed by another post with a picture of an adorable dog and kid in ski attire going down a mountain where it was kinda obvious that it was AI-generated, yet the comment section was all the same—“adorable,” the comments said.
Heck, even adding an “AI” tag to the description didn’t help, because who needs to read these days, right?! In all seriousness, this does point to an issue worth tackling, and that is AI awareness and literacy.
The content doesn’t even have to make sense, actually, as long as it makes them happy
Image credits: venturetwins
Image credits: venturetwins
Image credits: venturetwins
Image credits: venturetwins
Heck, even a warning sign is not enough
Image credits: venturetwins
Image credits: venturetwins
Image credits: venturetwins
Just think about it: not everything on the web is actually real. What makes you think folks won’t use AI to make fake things look more believable? That’s how scams work. That’s how hacking works. So, why not?
In fact, some of the comments under the thread pointed out that there is a high chance that the folks in the comment sections under each of these pictures might be bots themselves. The signs are definitely there—identical, short and vague responses, misspellings or grammatical issues, and the like.
But this doesn’t negate the fact that there is a non-zero chance of actual elderly folk being among those commenting and believing the content. Heck, you needn’t even comment—if you scroll across a picture and even think about it is enough for AI to have done its job.
And considering that people over the age of 65 are the least computer literate of all the age groups, it should be concerning. So, call your parents, let them know those pictures are fake.
The post itself went viral with 9.2M views, but it was also reshared on AI-focused media, too
View this post on Instagram
For those who need specifics, back in 2021, 61%, 45% and 44% of people over 65 owned a smartphone, used social media and owned a tablet computer respectively. 8% of them reported that they are almost constantly online. But compared to all other age groups, they are always last.
That same study, though, is shedding some positive light on the matter as the 2021 data actually shows that the percentage was the highest it’s ever been. From 2012 to 2021, smartphone ownership among sixty-fivers and up grew from 13 to 61% and the use of social media grew from 16 to 45%. So, more and more older folks are getting on board the computer train.
But that doesn’t mean they’re necessarily aware of the powers of AI. And considering their statistically inferior experience with computers in general, AI-focused education is a must. So, again, call your parents!
So, considering all that you’ve read, what are your thoughts on any of this? Is AI your friend or would you rather live in a world where it would never exist? Share your thoughts and takes in the comment section below!
A number of commenters pointed out that the elderly people commenting under the AI posts are also bots
Image credits: mayakyler
Image credits: findmyke
Image credits: nearcyan
Still, it doesn’t take away from the fact that there’s always a non-zero chance of actual elderly people falling for it
Image credits: jimmyandfam
Image credits: amasad
Image credits: TrungTPhan
Image credits: Kmuray
Image credits: NickSarafa
Image credits: 070guy
Image credits: alshlyapin
Image credits: ADectis
Image credits: Vojt33w
Image credits: axeldesigns
Image credits: cjhazard
Image credits: backloggedgamr
Image credits: King_Shunal
Poll Question
Thanks! Check out the results:
Subscribe to Access
Exclusive Polls
By entering your email and clicking Subscribe, you're agreeing to let us send you customized marketing messages about us and our advertising partners. You are also agreeing to our Privacy Policy.
Thank you! You've successfully subscribed to newsletters!
You May Also Like
Woman Refuses To Chip In For Babysitting Because She Doesn’t Even Have Kids, Asks If She’s A Jerk
Do you think childless individuals should be expected to chip in for group babysitting costs during friend gatherings?
17 Y.O. Is Done Sharing Her Birthday With Her Late Twin, Parents Are Not Having It
Do you think the girl should be allowed to celebrate her birthday without the remembrance of her deceased twin?
This article was awful. Boomers are stupid, can't tell the difference, look at their comments! And the comments were just lovely opinions of the picture the question of whether it's real or not didn't concern them they just enjoyed the image. I don't understand the boomer title i was born in the 70s so i don't know where that puts me but as far as i can tell people are getting ruder, more cruel, sneery and condescending. Can people not just enjoy stuff without being called out because they didn't know realise or understand its AI?
Yeah, what were they supposed post in their comments? "That is a terrible image because AI created it!" You got to wonder if those rude people go to an art museum and say, "That's not nature, it's a painting!" I much prefer some of the AI images to what people call art.
Load More Replies...
I agree with Loverboy's post. I think most of us would believe these images at first, especially if we aren't really thinking about it. Photoshop did this exact same thing a couple of decades ago. In my view, I wouldn't believe anything at face value. But with images of pretty places, nice homes, or even the baby and dog, they are simple images with no ulterior motive so it is of no consequence whether they are real or not. If I'm planning visiting or doing a report, it's different. And if it's political or something of consequence my skepticism is high. Otherwise I'll take it as a throwaway and not think twice.
The images are indeed harmless, the issue is how they are used. Most of these images are posted by profiles of self proclaimed "content creators" that rely on this content to amass a lot of reactions, comments and hence relevance on FB. A profile that has a high relevance and a good base of followers is an asset that is very attractive for scammers who nurture or buy these profiles to make them "respectable". Is a very common practice, it starts with the cute content and then asking for donations or "selling" fake merch follows. How many times I have seen scammers selling fake AI crocheted cats on FB, and people fall for it and give them their money because that cat is so cute.
Load More Replies... And all generations after them can identify forgery without fail? 🤣 Guys, we do understand how AI works. We do understand that the picture is not real. But we just enjoy/not enjoy the picture as such, as a piece of art. It is not necessary to wildly scream "fake AI" in cases it does not matter. Stay calm and address misleading AI, and get upset if it matters. "People above 65 are the least computer literate"? Oh dear. These people not only invented the whole thing and developed it to be accesible for the general public, they grew up with it. If your first steps were on a 8088 or some years later on a green or orange screen Apple, then you (i.e. we) know exactly how these things work. And this is why we worry so much, because later generations expand this technology without completely understanding its potential.
Quit with the boomers term - it's discrimatory and divisive. And no, I'm not a boomer.
It's literally a generation? It only matters how someone talks about it, same as race.
Load More Replies...
Whereas people who aren't baby boomers award photograph prizes to photos that have had colour saturation turned up to the max, shadows artificially added, false colour, contrast enhanced, and are multilayered from multiple photographs at different times of day. I know one famous nature photograph where the sunlight is entering the picture from four different directions at once. AI pictures typically do not have all these screamingly false photo manipulations.
People have been saying "seeing is believing" forever, but that has never been true. Humans aren't some cameras that records things perfectly, and there have always been ways that people have been tricked. The big difference with AI images it is going to be a lot easier to do, not that it was all that hard to fool a lot of people before.
ALL sorts of people are falling for AI generated stuff. Enough with the anti-generation nonsense BP.
From a Boomer - f**k you, Robertas Lisickis and Mindaugas Balčiauskas.
The real issues are: 1. Social Media has turned into an endless scroll of meaningless content (whether that content is AI or human generated, it's still meaningless). 2. So many people feel compelled to post replies that add nothing to the conversation. The one thing I miss about "traditional" is that it was curated. National Geographic only published the best or most impactful photos. The local newspaper only published letters-to-the-editor that had something to say. It was far from perfect, but if I chose a respected publication I was reasonably assured I'd get meaningful content. Online media doesn't have to be this way - as a Gen Xer, I was online in the early '90s and it had a much better signal-to-noise ratio. The problem really started when websites started using "algorithms" to create "recommendations" and "feeds". The algorithms seen attracted to fluff, fake news, and other lowest-common-denominator content. The one thing I wish services would use AI for is to curate content
Seriously, Bored Pand? No one can tell the difference most of time, boomer or gen Z.And yes, AI villa looks fabulous.
This is a slow news day kind of article. I'm 34 and wouldn't be able to tell if it was AI generated. Reason being is because I haven't spent all my free time comparing AI generated photos to non-AI photos. Let people just enjoy things. Sounds pretty boomer of the OP to harp on others for just enjoying something.
Looking at some of the pictures of people leaving the comments, it seems to be more than one generation posting comments. Agree the article was awful. Maybe it was done as an AI training project?
So called elderly people may not notice whether the image is real or AI and if they do, they may just not be bothered. The images can be stunning, it doesn't matter.
the example with the house is poorly chosen, I know a villa on Lake Como that looks exactly like this
The first picture of the "villa" has a pool where the water is ever so slightly raised and still square.
In the snowboarding picture, what is that creature in the middle of the photo, between the baby and the dog?
Well, of course we can't always tell the difference. AI pictures such as these don't look all that different than the photos influencers on Instagram have been swearing for YEARS are not filtered or photoshopped. We can usually catch on if it's something like a five-legged horse though.
So the real boomers were the ai chatbots we met along the way? This whole article is a dumpster fire starting with the premise: it isn't entirely impossible that some old people didn't care to look and see if these pictures were ai generated. It's unlikely to be true, just not entirely impossible. Thanks for the info, I guess
Decided I'm going to start logging in and just downloading s*** like this. I'm very tired of them creative staff doing all the slamming and name calling
This article was awful. Boomers are stupid, can't tell the difference, look at their comments! And the comments were just lovely opinions of the picture the question of whether it's real or not didn't concern them they just enjoyed the image. I don't understand the boomer title i was born in the 70s so i don't know where that puts me but as far as i can tell people are getting ruder, more cruel, sneery and condescending. Can people not just enjoy stuff without being called out because they didn't know realise or understand its AI?
Yeah, what were they supposed post in their comments? "That is a terrible image because AI created it!" You got to wonder if those rude people go to an art museum and say, "That's not nature, it's a painting!" I much prefer some of the AI images to what people call art.
Load More Replies... I agree with Loverboy's post. I think most of us would believe these images at first, especially if we aren't really thinking about it. Photoshop did this exact same thing a couple of decades ago. In my view, I wouldn't believe anything at face value. But with images of pretty places, nice homes, or even the baby and dog, they are simple images with no ulterior motive so it is of no consequence whether they are real or not. If I'm planning visiting or doing a report, it's different. And if it's political or something of consequence my skepticism is high. Otherwise I'll take it as a throwaway and not think twice.
The images are indeed harmless, the issue is how they are used. Most of these images are posted by profiles of self proclaimed "content creators" that rely on this content to amass a lot of reactions, comments and hence relevance on FB. A profile that has a high relevance and a good base of followers is an asset that is very attractive for scammers who nurture or buy these profiles to make them "respectable". Is a very common practice, it starts with the cute content and then asking for donations or "selling" fake merch follows. How many times I have seen scammers selling fake AI crocheted cats on FB, and people fall for it and give them their money because that cat is so cute.
Load More Replies... And all generations after them can identify forgery without fail? 🤣 Guys, we do understand how AI works. We do understand that the picture is not real. But we just enjoy/not enjoy the picture as such, as a piece of art. It is not necessary to wildly scream "fake AI" in cases it does not matter. Stay calm and address misleading AI, and get upset if it matters. "People above 65 are the least computer literate"? Oh dear. These people not only invented the whole thing and developed it to be accesible for the general public, they grew up with it. If your first steps were on a 8088 or some years later on a green or orange screen Apple, then you (i.e. we) know exactly how these things work. And this is why we worry so much, because later generations expand this technology without completely understanding its potential.
Quit with the boomers term - it's discrimatory and divisive. And no, I'm not a boomer.
It's literally a generation? It only matters how someone talks about it, same as race.
Load More Replies... Whereas people who aren't baby boomers award photograph prizes to photos that have had colour saturation turned up to the max, shadows artificially added, false colour, contrast enhanced, and are multilayered from multiple photographs at different times of day. I know one famous nature photograph where the sunlight is entering the picture from four different directions at once. AI pictures typically do not have all these screamingly false photo manipulations.
People have been saying "seeing is believing" forever, but that has never been true. Humans aren't some cameras that records things perfectly, and there have always been ways that people have been tricked. The big difference with AI images it is going to be a lot easier to do, not that it was all that hard to fool a lot of people before.
ALL sorts of people are falling for AI generated stuff. Enough with the anti-generation nonsense BP.
From a Boomer - f**k you, Robertas Lisickis and Mindaugas Balčiauskas.
The real issues are: 1. Social Media has turned into an endless scroll of meaningless content (whether that content is AI or human generated, it's still meaningless). 2. So many people feel compelled to post replies that add nothing to the conversation. The one thing I miss about "traditional" is that it was curated. National Geographic only published the best or most impactful photos. The local newspaper only published letters-to-the-editor that had something to say. It was far from perfect, but if I chose a respected publication I was reasonably assured I'd get meaningful content. Online media doesn't have to be this way - as a Gen Xer, I was online in the early '90s and it had a much better signal-to-noise ratio. The problem really started when websites started using "algorithms" to create "recommendations" and "feeds". The algorithms seen attracted to fluff, fake news, and other lowest-common-denominator content. The one thing I wish services would use AI for is to curate content
Seriously, Bored Pand? No one can tell the difference most of time, boomer or gen Z.And yes, AI villa looks fabulous.
This is a slow news day kind of article. I'm 34 and wouldn't be able to tell if it was AI generated. Reason being is because I haven't spent all my free time comparing AI generated photos to non-AI photos. Let people just enjoy things. Sounds pretty boomer of the OP to harp on others for just enjoying something.
Looking at some of the pictures of people leaving the comments, it seems to be more than one generation posting comments. Agree the article was awful. Maybe it was done as an AI training project?
So called elderly people may not notice whether the image is real or AI and if they do, they may just not be bothered. The images can be stunning, it doesn't matter.
the example with the house is poorly chosen, I know a villa on Lake Como that looks exactly like this
The first picture of the "villa" has a pool where the water is ever so slightly raised and still square.
In the snowboarding picture, what is that creature in the middle of the photo, between the baby and the dog?
Well, of course we can't always tell the difference. AI pictures such as these don't look all that different than the photos influencers on Instagram have been swearing for YEARS are not filtered or photoshopped. We can usually catch on if it's something like a five-legged horse though.
So the real boomers were the ai chatbots we met along the way? This whole article is a dumpster fire starting with the premise: it isn't entirely impossible that some old people didn't care to look and see if these pictures were ai generated. It's unlikely to be true, just not entirely impossible. Thanks for the info, I guess
Decided I'm going to start logging in and just downloading s*** like this. I'm very tired of them creative staff doing all the slamming and name calling
-50
49