ReallyActuallyFrankenstein

Her Hitler hairdo is making me feel ill.

Oh, wow...I let my guard down for one second. Ugh.

Edit: I've gone back and looked at it very closely. I still don't think it's AI, on balance. This seems like a still from a video clip that has compression artifacts. My clues:

Against AI:

• The fine details like whiskers have enough random but consistent imperfection that it doesn't match what AI normally outputs (either consistent perfection, or inconsistent imperfection - too-perfect whiskers or whiskers that blend into each other is what I'd expect from AI). There is some whisker-blending, but that seems more consistent with video compression blur than AI.
• The couch seems to have post-compression remnants of hairs that aren't likely from AI.
• The eyes are one area where AI is very inconsistent, but the irises (for dilated eyes) are very consistent. Though there is heterochromia, I'd expect to see some AI mess around the eyes.

For AI:

• I agree the chew toy looks off. I don't know that that counteracts the above.
• It could be cropped and compressed explicitly to obscure AI giveaway details.

I'm not 100% sure, but I suspect it's real.

Edit 2: As others have noted, it's real. My AI detector isn't obsolete, for a few more months/weeks/days at least.

Without hyperbole, this is actually the cutest kitten I've ever seen.

I bet Tucker - intrepid, unbiased and fearless journalist that he is - asked Putin about this, right?

... Right?

Putin is reading this comment thinking, "How did everythingispenguins find my diary?"

Cool story.

Why is it so hard for people to judge credibility? It's just (1) listen to a statement, (2) ask if what a person is saying directly benefits them and (3) if it does, require evidence to believe it.

We know this is not credible because by saying it, Putin diverts attention from his own corrupt election and normalizes election fraud. So did he provide evidence? No. So it should be ignored.

Can't we all just... Do that?

We were all thinking it.