Connect with us

STM Blog

AI-generated images can exploit how your mind works − here’s why they fool you and how to spot them

Arryn Robbins discusses the challenges of recognizing AI-generated images due to human cognitive limitations and inattentional blindness, emphasizing the importance of critical thinking in a visually fast-paced online environment.

Published

on

Last Updated on June 2, 2025 by Daily News Staff

Arryn Robbins, University of Richmond

I’m more of a scroller than a poster on social media. Like many people, I wind down at the end of the day with a scroll binge, taking in videos of Italian grandmothers making pasta or baby pygmy hippos frolicking.

For a while, my feed was filled with immaculately designed tiny homes, fueling my desire for a minimalist paradise. Then, I started seeing AI-generated images; many contained obvious errors, such as staircases to nowhere or sinks within sinks. Yet, commenters rarely pointed them out, instead admiring the aesthetic.

https://www.facebook.com/photo?fbid=948015667455503&set=gm.665399635824007&idorvanity=351768197187154

These images were clearly AI-generated and didn’t depict reality. Did people just not notice? Not care?

As a cognitive psychologist, I’d guess “yes” and “yes.” My expertise is in how people process and use visual information. I primarily investigate how people look for objects and information visually, from the mundane searches of daily life, such as trying to find a dropped earring, to more critical searches, like those conducted by radiologists or search-and-rescue teams.

With my understanding of how people process images and notice − or don’t notice − detail, it’s not surprising to me that people aren’t tuning in to the fact that many images are AI-generated.

We’ve been here before

The struggle to detect AI-generated images mirrors past detection challenges such as spotting photoshopped images or computer-generated images in movies.

But there’s a key difference: Photo editing and CGI require intentional design by artists, while AI images are generated by algorithms trained on datasets, often without human oversight. The lack of oversight can lead to imperfections or inconsistencies that can feel unnatural, such as the unrealistic physics or lack of consistency between frames that characterize what’s sometimes called “AI slop.”

Despite these differences, studies show people struggle to distinguish real images from synthetic ones, regardless of origin. Even when explicitly asked to identify images as real, synthetic or AI-generated, accuracy hovers near the level of chance, meaning people did only a little better than if they’d just guessed.

Advertisement
Get More From A Face Cleanser And Spa-like Massage

In everyday interactions, where you aren’t actively scrutinizing images, your ability to detect synthetic content might even be weaker.

Attention shapes what you see, what you miss

Spotting errors in AI images requires noticing small details, but the human visual system isn’t wired for that when you’re casually scrolling. Instead, while online, people take in the gist of what they’re viewing and can overlook subtle inconsistencies.

Visual attention operates like a zoom lens: You scan broadly to get an overview of your environment or phone screen, but fine details require focused effort. Human perceptual systems evolved to quickly assess environments for any threats to survival, with sensitivity to sudden changes − such as a quick-moving predator − sacrificing precision for speed of detection.

This speed-accuracy trade-off allows for rapid, efficient processing, which helped early humans survive in natural settings. But it’s a mismatch with modern tasks such as scrolling through devices, where small mistakes or unusual details in AI-generated images can easily go unnoticed.

People also miss things they aren’t actively paying attention to or looking for. Psychologists call this inattentional blindness: Focusing on one task causes you to overlook other details, even obvious ones. In the famous invisible gorilla study, participants asked to count basketball passes in a video failed to notice someone in a gorilla suit walking through the middle of the scene.

If you’re counting how many passes the people in white make, do you even notice someone walk through in a gorilla suit?

Similarly, when your focus is on the broader content of an AI image, such as a cozy tiny home, you’re less likely to notice subtle distortions. In a way, the sixth finger in an AI image is today’s invisible gorilla − hiding in plain sight because you’re not looking for it.

Efficiency over accuracy in thinking

Our cognitive limitations go beyond visual perception. Human thinking uses two types of processing: fast, intuitive thinking based on mental shortcuts, and slower, analytical thinking that requires effort. When scrolling, our fast system likely dominates, leading us to accept images at face value.

Adding to this issue is the tendency to seek information that confirms your beliefs or reject information that goes against them. This means AI-generated images are more likely to slip by you when they align with your expectations or worldviews. If an AI-generated image of a basketball player making an impossible shot jibes with a fan’s excitement, they might accept it, even if something feels exaggerated.

While not a big deal for tiny home aesthetics, these issues become concerning when AI-generated images may be used to influence public opinion. For example, research shows that people tend to assume images are relevant to accompanying text. Even when the images provide no actual evidence, they make people more likely to accept the text’s claims as true.

Misleading real or generated images can make false claims seem more believable and even cause people to misremember real events. AI-generated images have the power to shape opinions and spread misinformation in ways that are difficult to counter.

Advertisement
Get More From A Face Cleanser And Spa-like Massage

https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=1010254754457256&set=a.407186301430774

Beating the machine

While AI gets better at detecting AI, humans need tools to do the same. Here’s how:

  1. Trust your gut. If something feels off, it probably is. Your brain expertly recognizes objects and faces, even under varying conditions. Perhaps you’ve experienced what psychologists call the uncanny valley and felt unease with certain humanoid faces. This experience shows people can detect anomalies, even when they can’t fully explain what’s wrong.
  2. Scan for clues. AI struggles with certain elements: hands, text, reflections, lighting inconsistencies and unnatural textures. If an image seems suspicious, take a closer look.
  3. Think critically. Sometimes, AI generates photorealistic images with impossible scenarios. If you see a political figure casually surprising baristas or a celebrity eating concrete, ask yourself: Does this make sense? If not, it’s probably fake.
  4. Check the source. Is the poster a real person? Reverse image search can help trace a picture’s origin. If the metadata is missing, it might be generated by AI.

AI-generated images are becoming harder to spot. During scrolling, the brain processes visuals quickly, not critically, making it easy to miss details that reveal a fake. As technology advances, slow down, look closer and think critically.The Conversation

Arryn Robbins, Assistant Professor of Psychology, University of Richmond

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.


A beautiful kitchen to scroll past – but check out the clock. Tiny Homes via Facebook
AI-generated images

https://stmdailynews.com/space-force-faces-new-challenge-tracking-debris-from-intelsat-33e-breakdown/

Author


Discover more from Daily News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Continue Reading
Advertisement Sports Research

The Knowledge

Beneath the Waves: The Global Push to Build Undersea Railways

Undersea railways are transforming transportation, turning oceans from barriers into gateways. Proven by tunnels like the Channel and Seikan, these innovations offer cleaner, reliable connections for passengers and freight. Ongoing projects in China and Europe, alongside future proposals, signal a new era of global mobility beneath the waves.

Published

on

Train traveling through underwater tunnel
Trains beneath the ocean are no longer science fiction—they’re already in operation.

For most of modern history, oceans have acted as natural barriers—dividing nations, slowing trade, and shaping how cities grow. But beneath the waves, a quiet transportation revolution is underway. Infrastructure once limited by geography is now being reimagined through undersea railways.

Undersea rail tunnels—like the Channel Tunnel and Japan’s Seikan Tunnel—proved decades ago that trains could reliably travel beneath the ocean floor. Today, new projects are expanding that vision even further.

Around the world, engineers and governments are investing in undersea railways—tunnels that allow high-speed trains to travel beneath oceans and seas. Once considered science fiction, these projects are now operational, under construction, or actively being planned.

image 3

Undersea Rail Is Already a Reality

Japan’s Seikan Tunnel and the Channel Tunnel between the United Kingdom and France proved decades ago that undersea railways are not only possible, but reliable. These tunnels carry passengers and freight beneath the sea every day, reshaping regional connectivity.

Undersea railways are cleaner than short-haul flights, more resilient than bridges, and capable of lasting more than a century. As climate pressures and congestion increase, rail beneath the sea is emerging as a practical solution for future mobility.

What’s Being Built Right Now

China is currently constructing the Jintang Undersea Railway Tunnel as part of the Ningbo–Zhoushan high-speed rail line, while Europe’s Fehmarnbelt Fixed Link will soon connect Denmark and Germany beneath the Baltic Sea. These projects highlight how transportation and technology are converging to solve modern mobility challenges.

The Mega-Projects Still on the Drawing Board

Looking ahead, proposals such as the Helsinki–Tallinn Tunnel and the long-studied Strait of Gibraltar rail tunnel could reshape global affairs by linking regions—and even continents—once separated by water.

Why Undersea Rail Matters

The future of transportation may not rise above the ocean—but run quietly beneath it.

View recent photos

Unlock fun facts & lost history—get The Knowledge in your inbox!

We don’t spam! Read our privacy policy for more info.

Advertisement
Get More From A Face Cleanser And Spa-like Massage

Discover more from Daily News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Continue Reading

STM Daily News

Chinamaxxing: The Viral Trend Turning Geopolitics Into Aesthetic Fantasy

A viral social media trend called “Chinamaxxing” is turning geopolitics into aesthetic comparison—revealing more about generational frustration than China itself.

Published

on

Chinamaxxing: Crowded subway station with train. A deep dive into “Chinamaxxing,” the viral social media trend blending aesthetics, politics, and generational disillusionment.

At first glance, the videos seem harmless enough.

Clean subways gliding into spotless stations. Neon skylines glowing at night. Clips of high-speed trains, cashless stores, orderly crowds. Overlaid text reads something like, “Meanwhile in China…” or “They figured it out.”

This is “Chinamaxxing,” a loosely defined but increasingly visible social media trend where mostly young users frame China as a model of efficiency, stability, and modernity—often in contrast to life in the West.

What makes the trend notable isn’t just its subject, but its tone. Chinamaxxing is rarely explicit political advocacy. It’s not a manifesto. It’s a mood. Aesthetic admiration blended with subtle critique, delivered through short, visually compelling clips that invite comparison without context.

And that’s precisely why it has sparked debate.

What Is “Chinamaxxing,” Really?

Despite the provocative name, Chinamaxxing isn’t a coordinated movement or ideology. It’s better understood as an algorithm-driven pattern—a recurring style of content that rewards certain visuals and emotional cues.

Most Chinamaxxing content emphasizes:

  • Infrastructure and urban design
  • Technology embedded in daily life
  • Perceived order and efficiency
  • Implicit contrast with Western dysfunction

What it typically omits:

  • Political repression and censorship
  • State surveillance
  • Limits on speech and dissent
  • The lived diversity of Chinese experiences

The result is a highly curated portrayal—less about China as a nation, and more about what viewers want to believe is possible somewhere else.

Why It’s Gaining Traction Now

The rise of Chinamaxxing says as much about the West as it does about China.

For many young users, particularly Gen Z, the backdrop is familiar: rising housing costs, student debt, healthcare anxiety, political polarization, and a growing sense that institutions no longer function as promised.

In that environment, visually persuasive content showing order and functionality carries emotional weight. It offers relief from chaos—real or perceived.

Social platforms amplify this effect. Short-form video rewards clarity, contrast, and immediacy. A clean subway platform communicates more in five seconds than a policy analysis ever could. Nuance does not trend well. Aesthetics do.

Advertisement
Get More From A Face Cleanser And Spa-like Massage

The Social and Political Criticism

Critics argue Chinamaxxing crosses a line from curiosity into distortion.

By focusing exclusively on infrastructure and surface-level efficiency, the trend risks:

  • Normalizing authoritarian governance through lifestyle framing
  • Reducing political systems to consumer experiences
  • Ignoring the tradeoffs that make such systems possible

Supporters counter that Western media has long flattened China into a single negative narrative, and that admiration for specific aspects of another society is not the same as endorsing its government.

Both perspectives, however, miss something important.

What the Trend Actually Reveals

Chinamaxxing isn’t primarily about China. It’s about disillusionment.

It reflects a generation that:

  • Feels let down by existing systems
  • Engages politics emotionally rather than institutionally
  • Uses visual culture to express dissatisfaction indirectly

In this context, China becomes a projection surface—not because it is perfect, but because it appears functional.

That distinction matters.

Why This Matters

Chinamaxxing highlights how political understanding is evolving in the digital age. Governance is increasingly consumed not through debate or civic participation, but through comparison clips, memes, and aesthetics.

The risk isn’t admiration. It’s oversimplification.

When complex societies are reduced to visuals alone, public discourse loses depth. But when those visuals resonate, they also signal real unmet needs: stability, competence, and trust in institutions.

Ignoring that signal would be a mistake.

Advertisement
Get More From A Face Cleanser And Spa-like Massage

The STM Daily News Perspective

Chinamaxxing is not an endorsement, a conspiracy, or a joke. It is a cultural artifact—one that reflects generational anxiety, algorithmic storytelling, and the widening gap between expectations and reality.

The question it raises isn’t whether China is better.

It’s why so many people feel their own systems are no longer working.

Related Reading


More on This Topic from STM Daily News

Stay tuned to STM Daily News for more stories exploring internet culture, social media trends, and how digital platforms shape public perception. We’ll be publishing in-depth pieces that break down the societal impact of viral phenomena like Chinamaxxing, the psychology behind online political trends, and the evolving language of Gen Z culture.

Want alerts? Be sure to subscribe to our newsletter for the latest insights and analysis.

Author

  • Rod Washington

    Rod: A creative force, blending words, images, and flavors. Blogger, writer, filmmaker, and photographer. Cooking enthusiast with a sci-fi vision. Passionate about his upcoming series and dedicated to TNC Network. Partnered with Rebecca Washington for a shared journey of love and art. View all posts


Discover more from Daily News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Continue Reading

unknown

Fact Check: Did Mike Rogers Admit the Travis Walton UFO Case Was a Hoax?

A fact check of viral claims that Mike Rogers admitted the Travis Walton UFO case was a hoax. We examine the evidence, the spotlight theory, and what the record actually shows.

Published

on

Last Updated on February 6, 2026 by Daily News Staff

A fact check of viral claims that Mike Rogers admitted the Travis Walton UFO case was a hoax. We examine the evidence, the spotlight theory, and what the record actually shows.

In recent years, viral YouTube videos and podcast commentary have revived claims that the 1975 Travis Walton UFO abduction case was an admitted hoax. One of the most widely repeated allegations asserts that Mike Rogers, the logging crew’s foreman, supposedly confessed that he and Walton staged the entire event using a spotlight from a ranger tower to fool their coworkers.

So, is there any truth to this claim?

After reviewing decades of interviews, skeptical investigations, and public records, the answer is clear:

There is no verified evidence that Mike Rogers ever admitted the Travis Walton incident was a hoax.


 

Where the Viral Claim Comes From

The “confession” story has circulated for years in online forums and was recently amplified by commentary-style YouTube and podcast content, including popular personality-driven shows. These versions often claim:

  • Rogers and Walton planned the incident in advance

  • A spotlight from a ranger or observation tower simulated the UFO

  • The rest of the crew was unaware of the hoax

  • Rogers later “admitted” this publicly

However, none of these claims are supported by primary documentation.


What the Documented Record Shows

No Recorded Confession Exists

  • There is no audio, video, affidavit, court record, or signed statement in which Mike Rogers admits staging the incident.

  • Rogers has repeatedly denied hoax allegations in interviews spanning decades.

  • Even prominent skeptical organizations do not cite any confession by Rogers.

If such an admission existed, it would be widely referenced in skeptical literature and would have effectively closed the case. It has not.


The “Ranger Tower Spotlight” Theory Lacks Evidence

  • No confirmed ranger tower or spotlight installation matching the claim has been documented at the location.

  • No ranger, third party, or equipment operator has ever come forward.

  • No physical evidence or corroborating testimony supports this explanation.

Even professional skeptics typically label this idea as speculative, not factual.


Why Skepticism Still Exists (Legitimately)

While the viral claim lacks evidence, skepticism about the Walton case is not unfounded. Common, well-documented critiques include:

Advertisement
Get More From A Face Cleanser And Spa-like Massage
  • Financial pressure tied to a logging contract

  • The limitations and inconsistency of polygraph testing

  • Walton’s later use of hypnosis, which is controversial in memory recall

  • Possible cultural influence from 1970s UFO media

Importantly, none of these critiques rely on a confession by Mike Rogers, because none exists.


Updates & Current Status of the Case

As of today:

  • No new witnesses have come forward to confirm a hoax

  • No participant has recanted their core testimony

  • No physical evidence has conclusively proven or disproven the event

  • Walton and Rogers have both continued to deny hoax allegations

The case remains unresolved, not debunked.


Why Viral Misinformation Persists

Online commentary formats often compress nuance into dramatic statements. Over time:

  • Speculation becomes repeated as “fact”

  • Hypothetical explanations are presented as admissions

  • Entertainment content is mistaken for investigative reporting

This is especially common with long-standing mysteries like the Walton case, where ambiguity invites exaggeration.


Viral Claims vs. Verified Facts

Viral Claim:

Mike Rogers admitted he and Travis Walton staged the UFO incident.

Verified Fact:

No documented confession exists. Rogers has consistently denied hoax claims.


Viral Claim:

Advertisement
Get More From A Face Cleanser And Spa-like Massage

A ranger tower spotlight was used to fake the UFO.

Verified Fact:

No evidence confirms a tower, spotlight, or third-party involvement.


Viral Claim:

The case was “officially debunked.”

Verified Fact:

No authoritative body has conclusively debunked or confirmed the incident.


Viral Claim:

All skeptics agree it was a hoax.

Verified Fact:

Advertisement
Get More From A Face Cleanser And Spa-like Massage

Even skeptical researchers acknowledge the absence of definitive proof.


Viral Claim:

Hollywood exposed the truth in Fire in the Sky.

Verified Fact:

The film significantly fictionalized Walton’s testimony for dramatic effect.


Bottom Line

  • ❌ There is no verified admission by Mike Rogers

  • ❌ There is no evidence of a ranger tower spotlight hoax

  • ✅ There are legitimate unanswered questions about the case

  • ✅ The incident remains debated, not solved

The Travis Walton story persists not because it has been proven — but because it has never been conclusively explained.  

Related External Reading

Dive into “The Knowledge,” where curiosity meets clarity. This playlist, in collaboration with STMDailyNews.com, is designed for viewers who value historical accuracy and insightful learning. Our short videos, ranging from 30 seconds to a minute and a half, make complex subjects easy to grasp in no time. Covering everything from historical events to contemporary processes and entertainment, “The Knowledge” bridges the past with the present. In a world where information is abundant yet often misused, our series aims to guide you through the noise, preserving vital knowledge and truths that shape our lives today. Perfect for curious minds eager to discover the ‘why’ and ‘how’ of everything around us. Subscribe and join in as we explore the facts that matter.  https://stmdailynews.com/the-knowledge/

Author

  • Rod Washington

    Rod: A creative force, blending words, images, and flavors. Blogger, writer, filmmaker, and photographer. Cooking enthusiast with a sci-fi vision. Passionate about his upcoming series and dedicated to TNC Network. Partnered with Rebecca Washington for a shared journey of love and art. View all posts


Discover more from Daily News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Continue Reading

Trending