In those scenarios in the upcoming year, there will be authenticated 'Tom Cruise' versus non-authenticated individuals (substituting anyone else for Tom Cruise, such as a Republican, a Democrat, a woman of color, a black student, or a highly privileged liberal). But in all those cases, I believe there will always be those who are not authenticated versus those who are. Then, yes, it's up to people to decide whether to trust or not, given that they then know anything they see can be AI-generated and not the actual real person. I, personally, would not trust anything that isn't authenticated.
I want AI to combat the woke I mean crank out those T-2000s and destroy all those pronouns @CrixusTheUndefeatedGaul
And the biggest violator, cheater, and liar will be your masters in the Washington Establishment just as they are now, to your wild applause.
Visual models are becoming cheaper to the point of running some convincing deep fake simulations on a personal desktop. Your solutions propose gatekeeping at the top via watermarks, digital fingerprints,etc.., which has its pros and cons...the biggest con is keeping the similar mostly hands-off regulating paradigm with big tech. Winner takes all, makes all rules. Zuck is taking the opposite approach and is aiming to release another llama upgrade, which will ostensibly be mostly open source. Mistrel, led by a french team, is also open source though not with the money bin of money bins (money bin bin?) facebook has. Tough question to answer about who controlls AI progress. There are strong merits for both points of views. Who cares if openai or google hire best-in-class ethicists if their shares (Microsoft as openai proxy) tank by 10% in a day because of a bad AI demo that "lost their lead"? Openai had a coup to fire their ceo, only to end up firing the original board of directors involved and replacing them with microsoft cronies. What really happened? Everyone is still tight lipped about it. So if ai is free, will is cause rogue ais? Perhaps, but there's plenty of software day to day society runs on that is also open source. It's more resilient for it, if you can overlook the occasional times people used open source for evil.
Isn’t that exactly what each side says? That the other side wants anonymity because what they are saying is hateful and could lead to legal and other repercussions. In fact were you saying that people need anonymity to protect them from repercussions.
The Jews on campus are not hiding their faces. That's because they aren't the criminals and terrorists.
The bimbo leftist in Australia believes that she should be the arbiter of which ideas can be shared with the rest of the world.
There are many ways to approach labeling and authenticating content. Labeling could be an inherent feature of AI tools that are automatically generated, or perhaps it is left up to creators. Authenticating is an optional method for creators to protect their brand. Content provider platforms may provide an infrastructure that easily communicates content-type to end-users (AI-generated and by which AI, human-generated, unknown, ...). Whether open source or closed source doesn't matter much in how content is labeled or authenticated. If you take software today as an example (not exactly apples to apples, but the idea is similar), it can be signed or not. Most people will only trust software that has been signed.
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/world/51...h-australian-government-over-take-down-notice Elon Musk's X threatens legal fight with Australian government over take-down notice By Georgia Roberts for ABC Bishop Mar Mari Emmanuel was stabbed during a service at Christ The Good Shepherd Church in Sydney on 15 April 2024. Mar Mari Emmanuel was stabbed during a service at Christ The Good Shepherd Church in Sydney on 15 April 2024. Photo: Screenshot / YouTube Elon Musk's social media platform X is threatening a legal fight with the Australian government after being issued a take-down notice for X posts, including videos of the recent Sydney stabbings. Billionaire X Corp owner Musk has angered the government by pledging to fight an order to remove graphic footage of the stabbing attacks from his platform. Musk said the e-safety commissioner's take-down order on the footage was a demand for "global content bans" by Australia's "censorship commissar". X said it would remove the content while challenging the "unlawful and dangerous approach" in court. But late on Monday, the eSafety commissioner moved first in launching her own legal action, saying X was in defiance of the law because it had only hidden the content in Australia, making it visible to any Australian user who obscured their location using a virtual private network (VPN). The federal court granted a two-day injunction, ordering X to hide the material worldwide pending further consideration. But Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said he found it "extraordinary" that X chose not to comply with the order to remove the violent videos in the first place, and expressed incredulity it was trying to argue its "case". "This isn't about freedom of expression," the prime minister said. "Social media has a social responsibility".
Do you want to create a "Ministry of Truth" as your masters in the Biden (Obama) Regime attempted to do?
sure BTW, if you are interested.... Meta label AI-generated content SynthID: Google AI watermarks ... there are more
I have as much skepticism to this as schools and colleges detecting unearned essays and papers with 80%+ accuracy. If you consider encoded msgs and watermarks analogous to a currency (blacklist here instead of whitelist), what's to stop a local printer from counterfeiting their own without said protections?
It cracks me up when people on the right start quoting 1984 when it was written about them. Orwell was a Democratic Socialist.
These labels have to be understood in the context of the time when people lived. He was staunchly anti-authoritarian, after having seen what Stalinism did. "Socialist" is just a label. Just like "liberals" in the US are actually often the opposite of "liberal" in the sense it was originally meant - they are extremely authoritarian.
Don't they censor isht like Beheadings etc Does Musk want to bring the "dark web" to the light? Anything goes internet? Rocket River
