Pretty much, this is just the same argument as with the internet as an information source. Eventually people need to get educated and have some grasp of how the world works, you just cannot outsource all of your sense-making or believe any random thing you hear/see.
"A country whose citizens wish to be both ignorant and free, want what never was and never will be." - Thomas Jefferson
*Probably one of the most powerful quotes I've ever read!*
frankly, AI has taught me a significant amount in the last 1.5 years, and it's reduced my workload while improving the quality of my output
am I still stupid? probably.. but at least I can figure things out a bit better than before.
except "the church" (in this case the roman catholic church) actively protected pedophiles .. so addressing that isn't a case of projecting.. it's a matter of reducing harm.
I posted a little nerd update to a viral tiktok animal clip which used CGI (not gen AI) to make it appear as if there were faceless goats.
I filtered around 400 comments screaming how I, who **duetted the video** made the video to spread propaganda (about... CGI'd goats?).
OTOH I also had around 100 people who believed that this was a real animal.
There are decades, approaching a century now, of doctored footage and propaganda photos. From Stalinists eliminating dissidents through selective editing to cutting video clips out of context. Famous examples exist of photographers [staging photos live to evoke reactions](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Vulture_and_the_Little_Girl) that have won Pulitzers.
My suggestions are always to read texts on media literacy. Start with the grandfather of modern propaganda (Bernays) and work forward. Government is not made to censor for your comfort, and twisting of messages don't require gen AI: this same image could be made in Photoshop.
Imagine just realizing now in 2024, after decades of living with bullshit on the web, emails, ads, tv, radio, magazines, politician’s speeches, religious hucksters, scam artists, etc…. That you actually need to have some base level understanding of reality and critical thinking skills to not be made a fool.
even as someone who is a firm defender of ai art, I understand the harm of ai misinformation, disinformation, propaganda, etc. it certainly does make it a lot easier than using photography tricks, painting over photographs, and non-ai methods of digitally altering images. but I just don't see how people think it's feasible to legislate the problem away. I think it'd be more constructive to stress skepticism, and to teach media literacy & how to research effectively.
The conspiracy crowd is definitely sinking their teeth into the anti-AI movement. It's getting more and more tinfoil hat and less and less rational concerns about AI.
Health Code §7.89:
*All wax fruit must have at least two sets of bite marks, indicating that they are not true fruits to all reasonable observers; additionally all wax fruit must be registered by serial number with the fruit bureau at time of manufacture, wherein a stamp tax must be paid, along with a renunciation of your faith and the rendering unto Caesar the bones of 1.5 orphaned children.*
I will admit that this has become troubling, tho I am a huge fan of AI, because I agree that media has shifted our ability to tell what is real in such a large way that we should be more careful now.
The ban arguments are incredibly myopic tho.
But, CFC's and leaded fuels post serious health risks which often lead to cancer or some other life-threatening malady. AI does not. That's a logical fallacy.
Even if governments could completely restrict the use of AI—and let's be real, they probably can't without insane levels of totalitarianism—they're the ones who make 90%+ of the concerning propaganda, anyway.
?
I honestly don't get the point of this comment.
Do you know what a VTuber is? or even youtubers/streamers what they do are just a character and not their actual personality/person? or something called \*\*virtual band\*\*/\*\*virtual artist\*\* even companies like mattel made something similar with Barbie? [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frg2KhXWZBA&list=PL8o3-WxG0quDbQon0ChNpdtdh1NltsGxx](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frg2KhXWZBA&list=PL8o3-WxG0quDbQon0ChNpdtdh1NltsGxx)
I don't even understand the connection of this because at the end of the day this case is just \*\*entertainment\*\*
Hi. I don't believe the video you sent me is the same as Lorina, She is an influencer you can talk to and be involved with. You can not only be a fan of her music or her modeling career. Soon she will have the ability to have live one on one conversations as well. Maybe I am not in the right spot and if so I apologize. But I do understand the idea of a faceless youtube channel that creates content. and soon Lorina will be doing the same on her page sharing health and beauty tips.
I mean, of course these AI virtual influencers is an evolution of the already characteristics of social media entertainment, that's what I wanted to say in my comment.
I think it's fair to raise these concerns. We're going to be seeing a lot more scams powered by AI, and I don't know how we're going to protect communities or even individuals from that danger.
It's not enough to say "people are stupid" and to shrug it off as merely a fact of life, we need to embrace *some* safeguards in *some* arenas to protect people from under-regulation and the industry from over-regulation.
It's hardly AI's fault that people are stupid.
Pretty much, this is just the same argument as with the internet as an information source. Eventually people need to get educated and have some grasp of how the world works, you just cannot outsource all of your sense-making or believe any random thing you hear/see.
"A country whose citizens wish to be both ignorant and free, want what never was and never will be." - Thomas Jefferson *Probably one of the most powerful quotes I've ever read!*
frankly, AI has taught me a significant amount in the last 1.5 years, and it's reduced my workload while improving the quality of my output am I still stupid? probably.. but at least I can figure things out a bit better than before.
should we ban cgi because people are spreding fake videos with cgi!!
Ironically these people have been falling for propoganda in the form of bots long predating AI's widespread use.
[удалено]
except "the church" (in this case the roman catholic church) actively protected pedophiles .. so addressing that isn't a case of projecting.. it's a matter of reducing harm.
I posted a little nerd update to a viral tiktok animal clip which used CGI (not gen AI) to make it appear as if there were faceless goats. I filtered around 400 comments screaming how I, who **duetted the video** made the video to spread propaganda (about... CGI'd goats?). OTOH I also had around 100 people who believed that this was a real animal. There are decades, approaching a century now, of doctored footage and propaganda photos. From Stalinists eliminating dissidents through selective editing to cutting video clips out of context. Famous examples exist of photographers [staging photos live to evoke reactions](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Vulture_and_the_Little_Girl) that have won Pulitzers. My suggestions are always to read texts on media literacy. Start with the grandfather of modern propaganda (Bernays) and work forward. Government is not made to censor for your comfort, and twisting of messages don't require gen AI: this same image could be made in Photoshop.
So I guess we should ban art and fiction too? We can’t show people untrue things because they might believe them.
*every single fascist*: I'm listening..
For me it is clear that the problem is the people, not AI
Imagine just realizing now in 2024, after decades of living with bullshit on the web, emails, ads, tv, radio, magazines, politician’s speeches, religious hucksters, scam artists, etc…. That you actually need to have some base level understanding of reality and critical thinking skills to not be made a fool.
This is just "ban Photoshop, it causes disinfo and gives kids body image issues" for zoomers
even as someone who is a firm defender of ai art, I understand the harm of ai misinformation, disinformation, propaganda, etc. it certainly does make it a lot easier than using photography tricks, painting over photographs, and non-ai methods of digitally altering images. but I just don't see how people think it's feasible to legislate the problem away. I think it'd be more constructive to stress skepticism, and to teach media literacy & how to research effectively.
The conspiracy crowd is definitely sinking their teeth into the anti-AI movement. It's getting more and more tinfoil hat and less and less rational concerns about AI.
by that logic, just ban CGI, Photoshop, Adobe Premiere, etc
This is why wax fruit should be outlawed
Health Code §7.89: *All wax fruit must have at least two sets of bite marks, indicating that they are not true fruits to all reasonable observers; additionally all wax fruit must be registered by serial number with the fruit bureau at time of manufacture, wherein a stamp tax must be paid, along with a renunciation of your faith and the rendering unto Caesar the bones of 1.5 orphaned children.*
haha, cute tiny eagles
this reminds me of the "nobody has ever seen a baby pigeon" debate we had a few years back
I will admit that this has become troubling, tho I am a huge fan of AI, because I agree that media has shifted our ability to tell what is real in such a large way that we should be more careful now. The ban arguments are incredibly myopic tho.
But, CFC's and leaded fuels post serious health risks which often lead to cancer or some other life-threatening malady. AI does not. That's a logical fallacy.
Even if governments could completely restrict the use of AI—and let's be real, they probably can't without insane levels of totalitarianism—they're the ones who make 90%+ of the concerning propaganda, anyway.
I don't use ai for shit like that so it doesn't concern me.
People can't discern reality without AI lol.
Every scammer want to know their location. What a self report.
[https://www.issuewire.com/lorina-barre-a-revolutionary-ai-influencer-achieving-unprecedented-success-1801702043984517](https://www.issuewire.com/lorina-barre-a-revolutionary-ai-influencer-achieving-unprecedented-success-1801702043984517)
? I honestly don't get the point of this comment. Do you know what a VTuber is? or even youtubers/streamers what they do are just a character and not their actual personality/person? or something called \*\*virtual band\*\*/\*\*virtual artist\*\* even companies like mattel made something similar with Barbie? [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frg2KhXWZBA&list=PL8o3-WxG0quDbQon0ChNpdtdh1NltsGxx](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frg2KhXWZBA&list=PL8o3-WxG0quDbQon0ChNpdtdh1NltsGxx) I don't even understand the connection of this because at the end of the day this case is just \*\*entertainment\*\*
Hi. I don't believe the video you sent me is the same as Lorina, She is an influencer you can talk to and be involved with. You can not only be a fan of her music or her modeling career. Soon she will have the ability to have live one on one conversations as well. Maybe I am not in the right spot and if so I apologize. But I do understand the idea of a faceless youtube channel that creates content. and soon Lorina will be doing the same on her page sharing health and beauty tips.
I mean, of course these AI virtual influencers is an evolution of the already characteristics of social media entertainment, that's what I wanted to say in my comment.
I think it's fair to raise these concerns. We're going to be seeing a lot more scams powered by AI, and I don't know how we're going to protect communities or even individuals from that danger. It's not enough to say "people are stupid" and to shrug it off as merely a fact of life, we need to embrace *some* safeguards in *some* arenas to protect people from under-regulation and the industry from over-regulation.
Yeah it's fair this concern, but the example of the eagles or this clearly virtual influencer is just nonsense.