Groupthink From Bots

I participate in several public and private AI communities, and one fun exercise is to take another creator’s image generation prompt, run it yourself (using the same AI tool or a different tool), and see what happens. But certain tools can yield similar results, for explicable reasons.

On Saturday morning in a private community Zayne Harbison shared his Nano Banana prompt (which I cannot share here) and the resulting output. So I ran his prompt in Nano Banana and other tools, including Microsoft Copilot and OpenAI ChatGPT.

The outputs from those two generative AI engines were remarkably similar.

Copilot.
ChatGPT.

Not surprising, given the history of Microsoft and OpenAI. (It got more tangled later.)

But Harbison’s prompt was relatively simple. What if I provided a much more detailed prompt to both engines?

Create a realistic photograph of a coworking space in San Francisco in which coffee and hash brownies are available to the guests. A wildebeest, who is only partaking in a green bottle of sparkling water, is sitting at a laptop. A book next to the wildebeest is entitled “AI Image Generation Platforms.” There is a Grateful Dead poster on the brick wall behind the wildebeest, next to the hash brownies.

So here’s what I got from the Copilot and ChatGPT platforms.

Copilot.
ChatGPT.

For comparison, here is Google Gemini’s output for the same prompt.

Gemini.

So while there are more differences when using the more detailed prompt (see ChatGPT’s brownie placement), the Copilot and ChatGPT results still show similarities, most notably in the Grateful Dead logo and the color used in the book.

So what have we learned, Johnny? Not much, since Copilot and ChatGPT can perform many tasks other than image generation. There may be more differentiation when they perform SWOT analyses or other operations. As any good researcher would say, more funding is needed for further research.

But I will hazard two lessons learned:

  • More detailed prompts are better.

What Is Real? Maybe There’s Something To The Word “Trust” After All

I know it’s late on a Friday night (or perhaps Saturday morning where you are), but we need to speak about reality.

As you may know, I’ve grown tired of the word “trust” because of its overuse in the identity verification industry. When everyone repeatedly uses “trust” as a supposed differentiator, no one is differentiated.

But what happens if the overused word “trust” escapes the tired vision statements and starts to be taken seriously?

Why should my prospects trust Bredemarket?

Let’s bring this VERY close to home, why should Bredemarket’s prospects and clients trust me?

After all, there are many reasons why they shouldn’t trust me at all.

I claim to have worked for about two dozen clients (give or take) since 2000, but the majority of readers of this post cannot name one single Bredemarket client. A few of you can name one of my clients. (Especially if you’re the client in question.) Maybe someone can name two or three. This is by design, since I usually function as a de facto ghostwriter, where my work-for-hire words literally become the property of the client.

And there’s my whole biometric product marketing expert claim. Assume for the moment that I am NOT lying about my work history, and that I really was writing Latent Station 2000 proposals late at night in the 20th century. Does mere continuous employment make me an expert?

But at least in the 20th century you knew that a person was behind any claims. The person may have been lying through their teeth, but there was a person behind the lies. Today there may be no such person. What if Bredebot is NOT my only synthetic identity creation? What if I do not exist, and have never existed?

Ah…I can see the uncertainty entering your consciousness.

And now you’re thinking…that maybe you can’t trust anything I said over the last five years.

But now…

Why should your prospects trust you?

…think about how outsiders look at YOUR company.

And if outsiders have any reason to…um…trust you.

And what strategies and content you need to regain the trust of these outsiders.

Now I am not asking you to immediately trust my claim that Bredemarket can equip you with the content you need.

But we can take 30 minutes—for free—to talk about it. Schedule a meeting at https://bredemarket.com/mark/

Stop losing prospects! Use Bredemarket content for tech marketers

Avoid Typos (Papa Kegba)

One of the oddest movie song juxtapositions is the pairing of Pops Staples’ “Papa Legba” and John Goodman’s “People Like Us” in the David Byrne movie True Stories. While researching the former I accidentally typed Papa KEGBA. Which resulted in this.

Papa Kegba.

If you’re curious about the Google Gemini (Nano Banana this week) prompt used to create the first picture, I documented it in the Bredemarket Picture Clubhouse Facebook group here.

More On The Positive Economic Impact of Age-Controlled Products and Services

The U.S. Census Bureau has provided follow-up information that supplements its earlier report on Native American casinos, which I previously discussed. It turns out that the immigrant populations (you know, people of English and other descents) are cashing in also.

“The national total of state sales tax revenue from sports betting soared 382%, from $190 million in the third quarter of 2021 (when data collection began) to $917 million in the second quarter of 2025, according to the U.S. Census Bureau’s Quarterly Summary of State and Local Tax Revenue (QTAX).

“Sports betting became possible in May 2018 when the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act. Since then, a majority of states have legalized some form of sports betting; including online, mobile, retail sports betting and pari-mutuels (such as wagers made on horse-racing).

“Sports betting is a growing industry, and the tax revenue it generates helps fund public schools, roads, highways, law enforcement and gambling addiction treatment.”

Read the entire piece here.

Where’s the Benefit?

Inspired by Gene Volfe. People of a certain age will get the reference.

But even if you don’t know the difference between Clara Peller and Clara Barton, remember this: 

Prospects don’t care about features that excite you. They care about benefits that excite them. 

If you only list features, you might as well be talking to yourself…because you are.

Where’s the Benefit?

Federal Trade Commission Age Verification (and estimation?) Workshop January 28

A dizzying array of federal government agencies is interested in biometric verification and biometric classification, for example by age (either age verification or age estimation). As Biometric Update announced, we can add the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to the list with an upcoming age verification workshop.

Rejecting age estimation in 2024

The FTC has a history with this, having rejected a proposed age estimation scheme in 2024.

“Re: Request from Entertainment Software Rating Board, Yoti Ltd., Yoti (USA) Inc., and Kids Web Services Ltd. for Commission Approval of Children’s Online Privacy Protection Rule Parental Consent Method (FTC Matter No. P235402)

“This letter is to inform you that the Federal Trade Commission has reviewed your group’s (“the ESRB group”) application for approval of a proposed verifiable parental consent (“VPC”) method under the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Rule (“COPPA” or “the Rule”). At this time, the Commission declines to approve the method, without prejudice to your refiling the application in the future….

“The ESRB group submitted a proposed VPC method for approval on June 2, 2023. The method involves the use of “Privacy-Protective Facial Age Estimation” technology, which analyzes the geometry of a user’s face to confirm that the user is an adult….The Commission received 354 comments regarding the application. Commenters opposed to the application raised concerns about privacy protections, accuracy, and deepfakes. Those in support of the application wrote that the VPC method is similar to those approved previously and that it had sufficient privacy guardrails….

“The Commission is aware that Yoti submitted a facial age estimation model to the National Institute of Standards and Technology (“NIST”) in September 2023, and Yoti has stated that it anticipates that a report reflecting NIST’s evaluation of the model is forthcoming. The Commission expects that this report will materially assist the Commission, and the public, in better understanding age verification technologies and the ESRB group’s application.”

You can see the current NIST age estimation results on NIST’s “Face Analysis Technology Evaluation (FATE) Age Estimation & Verification” page, not only for Yoti, but for many other vendors including my former employers IDEMIA and Incode.

But the FTC rejection was in 2024. Things may be different now.

Grok.

Revisiting age verification and age estimation in 2026?

The FTC has scheduled an in-person and online age verification workshop on January 28.

  • The in-person event will be at the Constitution Center at 400 7th St SW in Washington DC.
  • Details regarding online attendance will be published on this page in the coming weeks.

“The Age Verification Workshop will bring together a diverse group of stakeholders, including researchers, academics, industry representatives, consumer advocates, and government regulators, to discuss topics including:  why age verification matters, age verification and estimation tools, navigating the regulatory contours of age verification, how to deploy age verification more widely, and interplay between age verification technologies and the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA Rule).”

Will the participants reconsider age estimation in light of recent test results?