How To Spot An AI Girl From The Real Thing

Two beautiful women, similar but not identical, headshots.

It was widely reported last week that people are already creating AI pics of girls, creating a fake persona around them, and then taking money from naieve and thirsty simps on the promise of nude photos. This of course, is a problem that is only going to get worse as AI images become ever more indistinguishable from the real thing. But we aren’t quite there yet. In which case, are there some clever hacks you can learn to spot an AI generated babe posing as a real girl, sort the thots from the bots, and prevent yourself from being catfished out of your money? Apparently there are, at least according to an article published yesterday by Life Hacker magazine. They list five ways you can distinguish the thot from the thbot :

  • Check the comment section.
  • Check the background.
  • The “too perfect” look.
  • Asymmetries, proportions, and hands.
  • Use AI-spotting software.

Read the full article with detailed explanations of the tips at :

Feeling confident now? Well there is a simple website that tests your ability to correctly guess whether a ‘photo’ of a girl is real or AI. You may want to try before and after you have studied the tips above.

But in the end, as the author of the LifeHacker article concedes, it doesn’t really matter, as it’s only a matter of time before such AI pictures are truly indistinguishable.

Claudia, the fake e-girl from Reddit, is fairly crude in terms of AI-imagery, but still good enough to have fooled at least some users. These types of fakes are only going to become more sophisticated, so in the future, there probably won’t be any way to tell who’s real and who’s been dreamed up by an AI.

The silver lining is that you’ll eventually be able to create your own, personal e-girls and e-boys and beyond, exactly fit your tastes. Whether knowing that they don’t actually exist will affect your “enjoyment” of them is another, more philosophical issue.

In a world in which it is impossible to know for certain whether a girl’s AI photo is real or not, we may cease to care, just as we don’t care that women wear make-up, and have even gotten so used to the fact that most Instagram babes use photo-editing and filters, that we no longer even think about it. A blogger I read who writes on the latest VR and mixed reality news, made an interesting point in relation to the AI nudes sold on Reddit story that is worth quoting here, for it sums up how AI porn will intersect with the adult Metaverse (remember that?) :

AI services are starting to be used to create images of women for “romantic purposes”. I think this creates another level of blending of virtual and real, which will be typical of the metaverse. People are appreciating or falling in love with girls that never existed, and are just created by the AI, a bit like NPCs of a virtual world. We are going to live in a reality where the line between what is real and what is not is becoming always more blurred… and people seem to be ok with it

Whenever a new sex tech trend emerges, it’s fun to guess what terminology will grow up to describe it. I’ve already playfully suggested ‘thbot’ for an AI ‘thot’. But if thousands or millions of men (and women) do indeed start to fall in love with AI babes and bots, whether knowing, not knowing, or not caring whether they are real or not, what word should we use to describe such people? There is already ‘digisexual’, but that is a wider term embracing any digital sex tech that ‘digisexuals‘ prefer to use for sexual and emotional satisfaction (over the ‘real’ thing). A more specific word might be ‘botsexual’, as proposed by AI entrepaneur Alexander Wang recently :

Others, perhaps, will just call them sAImps… 😉

About xhumanist

Xhumanist has been writing on porn/sex tech for nearly two decades, and has been predicting the rise of VR and AR porn, as well as AI porn, and their coming together to produce fully 'immersive porn', which would be indistinguishable from the real thing, and create a society of 'sexual abundance'. He identifies as a digisexual, and has been quoted in Wired Magazine.

View all posts by xhumanist →

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *