Calling out your need to put down others with petty, frivolous details to feel better about youself and your insecurities/frustrations is not an issue of offense. You're contributing to shut down an otherwise interesting discussion just because you feel the need to elevate yourself at the expense of others.
> But this is obvious for a trained eye, which a professional must have.
The fact is that you're clearly wrong, as demonstrated by this contest and the fact that the AI generated image was awarded the top prize by its jury.
Your only counterclaim is that you portray yourself as better than others without reason or substance, and in the process tried to make it about you and elevate yourself at the expense of others by spreading baseless accusations of incompetence.
Again, this says more about you than AI generated content and those who evaluate it, and this discussion is really not about you.
That a professional jury awarded the prize to an AI-generated image is proof that AI has reached a good enough level to fool a trained eye.
To come later, with prior knowledge that it was AI-generated, point out “tells” and generally armchair-quarterback the process, proves absolutely nothing about the jury’s competence.
Clearly you haven't spent much time in the art world. The idea of competence is fundamentally opposed with the reigning ideology in fine art (as opposed to commercial art).
It really isn't. It's fine you tried to play Catch the Differences after knowing what to look at. That's not what people do with photos running in contests.
Composition push-ups, color-theory pull-ups, subject lighting crunches. It’s not easy but you gotta get artistically ripped before you can be a judge art.
I think you're trying very hard to poke holes at a very run-of-the-mill process. It's easy to pick apart stuff post-facto when you have the benefit of context and hindsight, and you are certain of what you're looking at.
If instead you're judging artwork, it would be unthinkable to reason "this work is pretty good but the model's fingers might look a bit off, and that is a good enough reason to reject the prize".
Throwing blanket accusations of incompetence at the jury also says more about yourself than the contest.
The truth of the matter is that AI -generated images are becoming quite impressive and can be a challenge to tell apart. This is not a problem with a jury in a context. We had deep fakes in the recent past, and they are improving rapidly.
It's easy to try to elevate yourself by putting down others, but while you're there making claims like it's obvious that the streaming audio of Biden and Obama and Trump and Hillary hanging out playing Minecraft is bullshit, multiple high-ranking officials already fell for calls from people using similar tech to impersonate world leaders.