there's only really like seven basic plots; man v man, man v nature, man v self, man v society, man v fate/god, man v technology so we should probably just stop writing stories anyway
It would not surprise me if most people could not tell whether some story about the human condition is human or AI generated. Excluding actual visual artists that have specific context of the craft, most people already can't tell AI art from human art when put to a blind test.
As far as I know know AI art can't really follow instructions so it's actually very, very easy to tell the difference if you aren't biasing the test by allowing vague instructions permitting random results to be considered acceptable.
"Here's a photo of me and my wife, draw me and my wife as a cowboy in the style of a Dilbert cartoon shooting a gun in the air" can't be done by AI as far as I know, which is why artist are still employed throughout the world.
Last time I checked GenAI it wasn't able to handle multiple people, but giving Midjourney a picture of yourself, and asking it to "draw me as a cowboy in the style of a Dilbert cartoon shooting a gun in the air" is totally a thing it will do. Without a picture of you to test on, we can't debate how well the image looks like you, but here's one of Jackie Chan: https://imgur.com/a/6cBrHWd
Are you saying you can upload a picture to mid journey that it will use as a reference?
Jackie Chan is not a good example because he's a famous person it may have been trained on. I used myself as an example because it would be something that is novel to the AI, it would not be able to rely on it's training to draw me, as I am not famous.
