That sounds like satire, as you suggested. Are you really unsure?

No, see: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49973037

There's nothing illegal unless someone seriously thinks Obama signed it. The easiest example would be his signature on his wikipedia page. Clearly he didn't sign that page, nor (probably) did he authorize it.

▲

jkubicek 6 hours ago | parent [-]

I don't understand your argument. Wikipedia and a satirical cartoon are both things clearly not made by Obama, nobody in their right mind would be "fooled" by the presence of his signature.

These cartoons are intentionally drawn in the style of a cartoonist and feature their signature. The goal is forgery. The whole point of these AI-generated images is to look like the real thing.

	▲	gruez 5 hours ago \| parent [-]
		>These cartoons are intentionally drawn in the style of a cartoonist and feature their signature. The goal is forgery. The whole point of these AI-generated images is to look like the real thing. You can't seriously claim that the very person who prompted the AI image generator thinks the image it spit out was created by Brendan Loper?