Big news in generative AI today:
1) An instragram "influencer" pulling in $10,000 of ad revenue per month is fake. This seems like just the shell of the onion, as it is likely that hundreds to thousands of online instragram and tweeter personalities are make believe. Which would mean that billions of advertising dollars are going to the people behind the fake people, which are fat middle aged men from Ohio.
2) Sports Illustrated generated AI "reporters" and then used ChatGPT to write articles. Again, this is probably just an example of a company getting caught and is much more rampant than we want to believe.
3) Massive investments have been made by "law enforcement" to use artificial intelligence for monitoring video camera evidence. But the AI has been tricking it's humans into ignoring contradictory evidence. With AI generative video getting unbelievable good, pretty soon there will be very few accurate detection methods for discerning real vs. fake video online, and AI will mash these two fake and real pieces of evidence together to further convolute the matter. Video evidence in criminal trials will become less and less believable and reliable. We will lose track of reality.
Do we cede the reporting and advertising and law enforcement to our robot overlords? Do we have a choice in the matter? I've heard there are ways to trick AI but that will soon be steamrolled.
https://futurism.com/fake-ai-influencer-revenue
https://futurism.com/sports-illustrated-ai-generated-writers
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2023/11/20/does-a-i-lead-police-to-ignore-contradictory-evidence
When it comes to reporting should it matter if the information is AI generated if the facts are correct?
Humans are fallible and biased. Maybe AI would be more reliable when reporting on politics or wars between ethnic groups.
If technology progresses to the point where AI is reliable I'm all for it.
@vivify saidHow do you know if the facts are correct?
When it comes to reporting should it matter if the information is AI generated if the facts are correct?
Humans are fallible and biased. Maybe AI would be more reliable when reporting on politics or wars between ethnic groups.
If technology progresses to the point where AI is reliable I'm all for it.
@wildgrass saidThe same way any publication like Reuters fact-checks their material.
How do you know if the facts are correct?
But then again I guess you could never truly know. Maybe the Wall Street Journal, the Guardian and the BBC are full of crap. We all just assume their reporting is true but honestly can't really know.
@vivify saidThe fact checking itself relies on accurate reporting, leading to a self-immolating cycle. The more AI reporters out there who are relying on other information provided by AI, then there will be fewer ways to accurately fact check.
The same way any publication like Reuters fact-checks their material.
But then again I guess you could never truly know. Maybe the Wall Street Journal, the Guardian and the BBC are full of crap. We all just assume their reporting is true but honestly can't really know.
Consider the sports illustrated example, a well respected outlet, in which they had multiple contracted fake reporters working similar content. It isn't too far fetched to imagine they could manipulate records of sports history, based on a series of opinions and missing information. Tom Brady's deflated footballs, did he cheat? The AI can be lead to conclude one way or another and then us humans read it from multiple news sources and think it's a fact.
As long as the bylines are accurately identifying the writers as AI I'm ok with it. But sports illustrated wanted us to think they were real people. They got caught because they were extremely sloppy, which makes me think this is a lot more prevalent than we think.
As long as the bylines are accurately identifying the writers as AI I'm ok with it. But sports illustrated wanted us to think they were real people. They got caught because they were extremely sloppy, which makes me think this is a lot more prevalent than we think.In a nutshell, trust your source. After all, it is all we have. You may like JOe and Kia Scarborough, and I like, say, Bret Baier, who has a very responsible staff. He is not about to quote info that has not been verified. I know y'all think Breitbart is not your thing, nor Tucker Carlson (who you never gave us one lie that he ever told), but find someone you trust and go wtih it, and nothing else....unless you want to dig all day like Sonhouse does, finding convenient info.
@averagejoe1 saidBret baier and Tucker Carlson are not reporters. Both have been fooled by fake content e.g Sidney Powell.
In a nutshell, trust your source. After all, it is all we have. You may like JOe and Kia Scarborough, and I like, say, Bret Baier, who has a very responsible staff. He is not about to quote info that has not been verified. I know y'all think Breitbart is not your thing, nor Tucker Carlson (who you never gave us one lie that he ever told), but find someone you trust an ...[text shortened]... it, and nothing else....unless you want to dig all day like Sonhouse does, finding convenient info.
@averagejoe1 saidWe told you multiple lies Tucker has told.
In a nutshell, trust your source. After all, it is all we have. You may like JOe and Kia Scarborough, and I like, say, Bret Baier, who has a very responsible staff. He is not about to quote info that has not been verified. I know y'all think Breitbart is not your thing, nor Tucker Carlson (who you never gave us one lie that he ever told), but find someone you trust an ...[text shortened]... it, and nothing else....unless you want to dig all day like Sonhouse does, finding convenient info.
You just don’t want to hear it.
@shavixmir saidAndrew Breitbart
We told you multiple lies Tucker has told.
You just don’t want to hear it.
Edit (link not working)
@wajoma saidCalling it what it is, is a sign of intelligence.
Andrew Breitbart
Edit (link not working)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FhSy-6VqIww
The Jan. 6th insurrectionists, along with the rest of the asshats caught up by Trump's lies are some of THE dumbest people on the planet. Racists, sexists, transphobes and homophobes included. Dumb as dirt, all of them.
I, for one, can't be arsed to care if they're offended by the truth.
@suzianne saidRest your head dude.
Calling it what it is, is a sign of intelligence.
The Jan. 6th insurrectionists, along with the rest of the asshats caught up by Trump's lies are some of THE dumbest people on the planet. Racists, sexists, transphobes and homophobes included. Dumb as dirt, all of them.
I, for one, can't be arsed to care if they're offended by the truth.
@suzianne saidTotally agree!
Calling it what it is, is a sign of intelligence.
The Jan. 6th insurrectionists, along with the rest of the asshats caught up by Trump's lies are some of THE dumbest people on the planet. Racists, sexists, transphobes and homophobes included. Dumb as dirt, all of them.
I, for one, can't be arsed to care if they're offended by the truth.
@wildgrass saidwhat content
Bret baier and Tucker Carlson are not reporters. Both have been fooled by fake content e.g Sidney Powell.
@shavixmir saidYou did not, and you will not.
We told you multiple lies Tucker has told.
You just don’t want to hear it.