A pair of AI-generated wayspots from Nottingham, UK. They look convincing at first until you zoom in and the text is garbage. They don’t show on StreetView. Low-res photos is a telltale sign as well, these are only 1 megapixel or so.
Nottingham Heritage Trails Sign
(in voting)
52.95541844284935, -1.1659943302396727
7 Ashbourne Street, Nottingham, England, United Kingdom
The supporting photo does not show the wayspot, a good indicator that it may be fake.
Wellington Villas Map Sign
(approved)
52.955821894885446, -1.1662080100984913
This one looks like it uses StreetView for the background.
These two were near each other, so could be isolated. I didn’t see any others in the immediate vicinity.
2 Likes
I got that second one (Wellington Villas) in review, but didn’t check it closely enough to realise it was fake. I simply rejected for invalid location after checking streetview and assumed the photo was taken from elsewhere.
When rejecting something for location because it doesn’t appear on streetview but should (because streetview covers that place), checking for a fake submission needs to be the next step.
I suspect this will only get worse as ‘AI’ gets better at images.
1 Like
I’ve amended the title to be clear that this is about the photos.
It does find text in the photo difficult to do.
1 Like
That “Nottingham Heritage Trails Sign” has been accepted. Here’s another one up for review in the same area, looks like an AI generated mural based on a StreetView capture (the upper dormer windows seem wrong). It’s very close to the other two fake ones.
Robin Hood Nottingham Graffiti
1 Ashbourne Street, Nottingham, England, United Kingdom
52.95530516508506, -1.166618557338561
Again, relatively low-res photo (under 1 megapixel) and wayspot does not appear in the supporting picture.
@NianticAaron or someone in the team, please can you look into this.
3 Likes
It’s going to take a while to remember I need to check for AI images when something isn’t on streetview. I got this in review, rejected it (can’t now remember precisely why), but never thought to check for AI. 
This is going to make the review process a little less pleasant.
1 Like
Hi @shritwod , thanks for reporting. We have shared to our team to be reviewed. We will follow up once the review is completed. Regards,
2 Likes
I did doubt at first that it was permanent, but then thought the colours were a bit weird. On zooming in I noticed that it was a low-res photo and the wayspot didn’t show in the supporting one.. then I realised it was next to the other two.
2 Likes
The brickwork in the circled area is completely off
Strangely it has taken information about Robin Hood, Nottingham and shooting arrows, and I think mixed in William Tell shooting arrows at an apple
2 Likes
We’ve reviewed the Wayspots/nominations and taken appropriate action as per our policies. Any incorrect changes to the Wayspot have been reversed. While we are unable to discuss our actions in detail to protect the submitter/reviewer’s privacy, they may include, but are not limited to, sending a warning message, placing restrictions on their Wayfarer or Pokémon GO, putting their account on probation, or placing a temporary or permanent suspension on their Wayfarer or Pokémon GO accounts.
Thanks for helping us maintain the quality of the Niantic Wayspots.
Regards,
5 Likes
I know I am late to the topic but, I am scared on the future of the submission could be filled with AI that can input perfect text and image. One day we might not able to identify via just photo and only by outdated streetview.
5 Likes
At the moment I haven’t seen an AI that can generate an identical image in both the main and supporting photos. In most of the ones I have seen, the supporting photo does not show the proposed wayspot which is always a red flag IMO.
2 Likes
Maybe a change of criteria allowing to reject as “2nd image does not show proposed wayspot” and “2nd image is a copy of the main image”.
Maybe when eMiLy returns to the office she could removed the “same image used” ones for us.
2 Likes
Thanks for sharing the feedback with us. We’d like to let you know that the growing AI generated image has been brought to our team’s attention. We understand the importance of addressing AI-generated submissions, and this has been taken into consideration as we explore options for tackling applying measures in the future.
13 Likes
Nice to see my local city getting mentioned, but for the wrong reasons.. anyways if I think something looks ai generated I just zoom in and see the small text and on both of those signs it’s just gibberish
1 Like
One more thing I would like to point and to be wary of - some modern phones do use genai to denoise photos, for instance if I use a zoom on my phone and there’s some tiny text in it, after taking the shot and zooming in, it does look like ai squibbles. One more thing to be wary of. (But it is not a case in the example photos I believe)
