Tax rule

Nice “gotcha”. Why don’t you ask AI to make me the soyjack and you the chad while you’re at it. If AI hallucinations fed by thousands of hours of stolen labor is what you classify as fun then you can keep it.

No fun theft allowed.

FTFY

i too like to use a program that takes millions of people's artworks and amalgamates them into something that slightly resembles a phrase i typed into a chat box

He wouldn't pass an independent test, he doesn't have autism he has a bad case of narcissism

They’ll probably come for us adhd-ers too

where the actual fuck in my apartment am i going to hide the giant fucking millennium falcon lego

There are two main points to getting a diagnosis:

1. Access to mental health services and acomodations, which will often require "proof". Up to you to decide if you need that.
2. Getting "closure" and self-understanding. Which is what most "high functioning" adults are really looking for with a late diagnosis. That does not require your psychiatrist to write anything down though. In your position I'd explicitly ask for that.

TikTok Gave Me Autism: The Politics of Self Diagnosis

He's already talked about "work camps" for people who are "addicted" to things like SSRIs.

Disgrace to humanity is absolutely right, and somehow still now adequate for the piece of shit he is.

That being said, I can't find a source for him talking about "work camps" for people who are "addicted" to things like SSRIs. The only thing related to SSRIs and him turning up for me is how he thinks it overprescribed. Could you provide a source that I could read up on and educate myself on?

The text gives it away; AI generated text always looks a bit off with its inconsistent sizing, kerning, and distortion.

To me, the giveaway is the weird facial evolution. Why would she listen to it with an angry face and then get happy? An actual person would give the first frame a surprised expression

It's not even sepia colored... It's... evolving.

Reverse image searching this reveals this comic was first posted on facebook four months ago, and a mix of similar AI and human drawn comics, so yeah I would say that checks out.

This is better evidence, but still would be difficult to keep such consistency with the character. That would be quite the advancement itself.

inconsistent arm length

Because it is impossible for humans to get anatomy wrong, or just not care. Right panel is a compromise: Gesture wants negative space to the right (gal is running), panel width is limited, don't want to cut off hand, so make arms different length it's a comic FFS.

the distorted/melty flowers in the third panel

Because everything humans paint is hyperrealistic and infinite detail. Impressionist technique doesn't exist.

the bottom of the TV stand

...what? Best guess I have is that you think that it's geometrically wrong but it just doesn't have a door, drawers, or such. Which btw would break the composition.

kinda melty/bendy lines here and there

Smudge tool don't exist.

Inconsistent arm length is only proof that someone might have issues with reference sizing, not AI. Webcomic Pixie and Brutus had it so bad the artist made it into a hilarious joke and then stated they'd finally make a size reference chart to keep it consistent in the future. Freaking animated series Steven Universe, a professional production, constantly had issues with not just limb lengths but size consistency as well. Size consistency is the worst reasoning of them all if anything.

The flowers in the background could just be that the artist has issues with distance perspective / drawing. A lot of artists who don't do backgrounds have that issue.

And like I already mentioned, the best evidence so far would be the blur lines surrounding the character, which would be evidence of AI in that they added the character into these backgrounds, but not only could that also be just a standard blur tool (because the artist isn't good at backgrounds), but it would be weird that someone using Ai to make this would go through all the work of training a custom LORA or model on this character specifically, but wouldn't reduce the size of blurring in the parameters when inpainting. It's possible, sure, but usually someone who already went to the lengths of learning how to train a model or such to achieve such consistent results would also quickly look up how to set the inpainting parameters to not show such a massive blur line.

But the other thing to note that this might not be AI is the aspect ratio. Presumably this would have been done as separate panels on AI, and then you'd crop if needed and make a fake comic panels. If so, why would you crop the edges of the comic / leave them incomplete? Usually that's specifically where an artist of this type of comic panel would sign their work too, if they chose too. Cropping out signatures is something commonly done by people reposting work done by real artists, and has been an issue for years as well.

Now, all this is too say that it's not definite that this is made by a human. The point is that there's no strong evidence that it's AI. The clothes are consistent, the shoes and fingers are as well. That there's 5 fingers is actually suspicious, but it's definitely something an amateur artist would choose to do.

To me, the most likely case is this is a mix of AI and real drawn work / lots of manual editing work (for example, the mouth in panel 2 and 3 look the same, indicating it may have been copy and pasted by hand rather than generated). But my second guess it's purely drawn work with a lot of manual editing. What I can say is this is very unlikely to be 100% AI.