@nerdram.bsky.social
So you thought you'd spread it. Yeah great, American politics infecting everything, yawn
October 21, 2025 at 8:42 PM
So you thought you'd spread it. Yeah great, American politics infecting everything, yawn
It's cringe as fuck. Her tracing art for years isn't anything to do with politics.
This is just more constant politics bros turning everything into an "us Vs them"
This is just more constant politics bros turning everything into an "us Vs them"
October 21, 2025 at 8:09 PM
It's cringe as fuck. Her tracing art for years isn't anything to do with politics.
This is just more constant politics bros turning everything into an "us Vs them"
This is just more constant politics bros turning everything into an "us Vs them"
Cringe at bringing politics into this thread
October 21, 2025 at 7:58 PM
Cringe at bringing politics into this thread
Still denying it, still taking people's money
October 21, 2025 at 11:21 AM
Still denying it, still taking people's money
That brings the total in both docs to 60 btw lol
October 20, 2025 at 5:41 PM
That brings the total in both docs to 60 btw lol
32 more traces found, as well as mothdusky's deviant art account with all the AI pieces favourited. New doc:
docs.google.com/document/d/1...
Still your video is up defending a scammer and helping them take people's money without telling them it's stolen AI.
docs.google.com/document/d/1...
Still your video is up defending a scammer and helping them take people's money without telling them it's stolen AI.
Mothdusky doc 2.0 the final show down
Hello again everyone! We really appreciate everyone who read, shared, discussed and enjoyed the evidence compiled in Doc 1.0. That said, we’ve put together the final doc to this saga...
docs.google.com
October 20, 2025 at 5:25 PM
32 more traces found, as well as mothdusky's deviant art account with all the AI pieces favourited. New doc:
docs.google.com/document/d/1...
Still your video is up defending a scammer and helping them take people's money without telling them it's stolen AI.
docs.google.com/document/d/1...
Still your video is up defending a scammer and helping them take people's money without telling them it's stolen AI.
Compilation of evidence
docs.google.com/document/d/1bt…
docs.google.com/document/d/1bt…
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1bt…
October 19, 2025 at 3:35 PM
Compilation of evidence
docs.google.com/document/d/1bt…
docs.google.com/document/d/1bt…
The only questions it opens up are did she really think she'd get away with this forever?
When tracing AI why not generate your own instead of stealing already online pieces.
Like, how dumb is that
When tracing AI why not generate your own instead of stealing already online pieces.
Like, how dumb is that
October 19, 2025 at 3:20 PM
The only questions it opens up are did she really think she'd get away with this forever?
When tracing AI why not generate your own instead of stealing already online pieces.
Like, how dumb is that
When tracing AI why not generate your own instead of stealing already online pieces.
Like, how dumb is that
Anyone drawing their own conclusions should watch out mothdusky doesn't come along and trace them to sell as her own.
October 19, 2025 at 3:17 PM
Anyone drawing their own conclusions should watch out mothdusky doesn't come along and trace them to sell as her own.
It sounds as though you're not even looking. How can you be defending someone without even knowing what's going on?
Here's a document where someone compiled a lot of examples.
docs.google.com/document/u/0...
Here's a document where someone compiled a lot of examples.
docs.google.com/document/u/0...
MothDusky Tracing Evidence
docs.google.com
October 19, 2025 at 3:16 PM
It sounds as though you're not even looking. How can you be defending someone without even knowing what's going on?
Here's a document where someone compiled a lot of examples.
docs.google.com/document/u/0...
Here's a document where someone compiled a lot of examples.
docs.google.com/document/u/0...
This website is enough to prove it 100%. What mothdusky is claiming is not possible. Regardless of all other cases of tracing.
astronauts.wtako.net
If you don't understand why that's the case, you're wasting your time and just muddying the waters protecting a scammer.
astronauts.wtako.net
If you don't understand why that's the case, you're wasting your time and just muddying the waters protecting a scammer.
System Monitor
astronauts.wtako.net
October 18, 2025 at 1:18 AM
This website is enough to prove it 100%. What mothdusky is claiming is not possible. Regardless of all other cases of tracing.
astronauts.wtako.net
If you don't understand why that's the case, you're wasting your time and just muddying the waters protecting a scammer.
astronauts.wtako.net
If you don't understand why that's the case, you're wasting your time and just muddying the waters protecting a scammer.
I'll stop updating you. It's a shame you are making videos defending a scammer whilst doing absolutely zero research yourself, just believing the scammer with no hard proof.
Shame on you. I hope you update once Mothdusky admits it.
This is why AI is fucking over artists so badly.
Shame on you. I hope you update once Mothdusky admits it.
This is why AI is fucking over artists so badly.
October 18, 2025 at 12:27 AM
I'll stop updating you. It's a shame you are making videos defending a scammer whilst doing absolutely zero research yourself, just believing the scammer with no hard proof.
Shame on you. I hope you update once Mothdusky admits it.
This is why AI is fucking over artists so badly.
Shame on you. I hope you update once Mothdusky admits it.
This is why AI is fucking over artists so badly.
There are now 16 pieces confirmed as being traced.
If anyone draws any conclusion other than mothdusky is a tracer then frankly they are dumb. 1 piece matching 1:1 could be an astronomical coincidence, but this many?
If anyone draws any conclusion other than mothdusky is a tracer then frankly they are dumb. 1 piece matching 1:1 could be an astronomical coincidence, but this many?
October 18, 2025 at 12:27 AM
There are now 16 pieces confirmed as being traced.
If anyone draws any conclusion other than mothdusky is a tracer then frankly they are dumb. 1 piece matching 1:1 could be an astronomical coincidence, but this many?
If anyone draws any conclusion other than mothdusky is a tracer then frankly they are dumb. 1 piece matching 1:1 could be an astronomical coincidence, but this many?
Further details from mothdusky customer.
Order placed on June 2nd
AI source piece uploaded in March
Order placed on June 2nd
AI source piece uploaded in March
October 17, 2025 at 11:19 PM
Further details from mothdusky customer.
Order placed on June 2nd
AI source piece uploaded in March
Order placed on June 2nd
AI source piece uploaded in March
Mothdusky's customer has been shown the evidence that their piece was traced from AI (a different piece not the space hyena) and has confirmed the commission for that one was after the AI was posted
October 17, 2025 at 11:05 PM
Mothdusky's customer has been shown the evidence that their piece was traced from AI (a different piece not the space hyena) and has confirmed the commission for that one was after the AI was posted
Or in midjourneys case their overtraining in movie trailers.
This is a pony based model also, they use danbooru style tags. These models are usually trained on art scraped from danbooru as it's already tagged.
This is a pony based model also, they use danbooru style tags. These models are usually trained on art scraped from danbooru as it's already tagged.
October 17, 2025 at 12:24 PM
Or in midjourneys case their overtraining in movie trailers.
This is a pony based model also, they use danbooru style tags. These models are usually trained on art scraped from danbooru as it's already tagged.
This is a pony based model also, they use danbooru style tags. These models are usually trained on art scraped from danbooru as it's already tagged.
And if the sketch is included in training, why was it included in duplicate enough times that the model has a bias to reproduce it?
It's a curated dataset made by an individual. That over fitting issue happens with repeats in dataset. It's why you mostly see it with Mona Lisa.
It's a curated dataset made by an individual. That over fitting issue happens with repeats in dataset. It's why you mostly see it with Mona Lisa.
October 17, 2025 at 12:24 PM
And if the sketch is included in training, why was it included in duplicate enough times that the model has a bias to reproduce it?
It's a curated dataset made by an individual. That over fitting issue happens with repeats in dataset. It's why you mostly see it with Mona Lisa.
It's a curated dataset made by an individual. That over fitting issue happens with repeats in dataset. It's why you mostly see it with Mona Lisa.
The maths is completely overwhelming compared to some misleading screenshots and a speed tracing video with a layer hidden.
October 17, 2025 at 12:19 PM
The maths is completely overwhelming compared to some misleading screenshots and a speed tracing video with a layer hidden.
As you can see the AI can output thousands of variations that do not have the same pose/lines/silhouettes.
And it just so happens that one of the tiny sample set of these images on civitai perfectly matches lines, silhouettes and details of mothdusky piece.
That is astronomically unlikely.
And it just so happens that one of the tiny sample set of these images on civitai perfectly matches lines, silhouettes and details of mothdusky piece.
That is astronomically unlikely.
October 17, 2025 at 12:17 PM
As you can see the AI can output thousands of variations that do not have the same pose/lines/silhouettes.
And it just so happens that one of the tiny sample set of these images on civitai perfectly matches lines, silhouettes and details of mothdusky piece.
That is astronomically unlikely.
And it just so happens that one of the tiny sample set of these images on civitai perfectly matches lines, silhouettes and details of mothdusky piece.
That is astronomically unlikely.
This webpage shows the outputs of running that generation 1000 times with varying seeds
astronauts.wtako.net
Is it more likely that the AI generated a perfect version of the finished piece with identical details to mothdusky version?
Or is it more likely mothdusky traced the image?
astronauts.wtako.net
Is it more likely that the AI generated a perfect version of the finished piece with identical details to mothdusky version?
Or is it more likely mothdusky traced the image?
System Monitor
astronauts.wtako.net
October 17, 2025 at 12:17 PM
This webpage shows the outputs of running that generation 1000 times with varying seeds
astronauts.wtako.net
Is it more likely that the AI generated a perfect version of the finished piece with identical details to mothdusky version?
Or is it more likely mothdusky traced the image?
astronauts.wtako.net
Is it more likely that the AI generated a perfect version of the finished piece with identical details to mothdusky version?
Or is it more likely mothdusky traced the image?
At this point it's pure copium.
If the model included the sketch in it's training then both mothdusky and the AI model added all the same details and the image has the same details, silhouette and outline.
That is not mathematically likely at all.
If the model included the sketch in it's training then both mothdusky and the AI model added all the same details and the image has the same details, silhouette and outline.
That is not mathematically likely at all.
October 17, 2025 at 11:48 AM
At this point it's pure copium.
If the model included the sketch in it's training then both mothdusky and the AI model added all the same details and the image has the same details, silhouette and outline.
That is not mathematically likely at all.
If the model included the sketch in it's training then both mothdusky and the AI model added all the same details and the image has the same details, silhouette and outline.
That is not mathematically likely at all.
The ai piece was made using 1 model on the civitai platform. As per screenshot shared by mothdusky herself.
All the metadata is there, it shows the specific model and people have literally reproduced it. Same inputs mean same outputs. It was one single model.
All the metadata is there, it shows the specific model and people have literally reproduced it. Same inputs mean same outputs. It was one single model.
October 17, 2025 at 11:45 AM
The ai piece was made using 1 model on the civitai platform. As per screenshot shared by mothdusky herself.
All the metadata is there, it shows the specific model and people have literally reproduced it. Same inputs mean same outputs. It was one single model.
All the metadata is there, it shows the specific model and people have literally reproduced it. Same inputs mean same outputs. It was one single model.
Please stop letting AI bros screw people over. Mothdusky hasn't posted any verifiable evidence.
Customers lose, and other commission artists lose.
Mothdusky can clearly do great work with or without AI. It's not right to hide it though, it's unfair to consumers and "colleagues/competitors".
Customers lose, and other commission artists lose.
Mothdusky can clearly do great work with or without AI. It's not right to hide it though, it's unfair to consumers and "colleagues/competitors".
October 16, 2025 at 8:24 PM
Please stop letting AI bros screw people over. Mothdusky hasn't posted any verifiable evidence.
Customers lose, and other commission artists lose.
Mothdusky can clearly do great work with or without AI. It's not right to hide it though, it's unfair to consumers and "colleagues/competitors".
Customers lose, and other commission artists lose.
Mothdusky can clearly do great work with or without AI. It's not right to hide it though, it's unfair to consumers and "colleagues/competitors".