• rabber@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    25 minutes ago

    I like to think humans will go back to interacting with each other in person thanks to AI destroying the internet

  • CarrotsHaveEars@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    6 hours ago

    Photorealistic porns? What’s your problem, man? You have realistic AI and this is all you’ll have? Just order a silicon doll and put an AI chip into it! Free sex-sla wife!

  • nebulaone@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    edit-2
    7 hours ago

    Reputation and PGP signatures could be used to verify real human made content. That is, of course, if people actually care, which I think will be rare.

    There might be no-ai communities, that require this and are closed down to avoid being scraped for ai training.

    Edit: Also AI is already enshittifiying itself, which might get worse if it becomes more widespread than it already is.

    • alekwithak@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 minutes ago

      I like webghost0101’s Idea:

      […] a blockchain linked video camera where metadata of footage gets written into the chain to combat fake news and misinformation.

      The goal would be to create a proof and record of original footage, to which media publishers and people who share can link towards to verify authenticity/author.

      If the media later gets manipulated or reframed you would be able to verify this by comparing it to the original record.

  • wowwoweowza@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    8 hours ago

    Read classics:

    Pride and Prejudice" by Jane Austen, “Moby Dick” by Herman Melville, “The Great Gatsby” by F. Scott Fitzgerald, and “1984” by George Orwell.

    Start here. There are thousands.

      • wowwoweowza@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 hours ago

        For the same reason your user name is not buendiablo?

        I guess we can all suffer a little eurocentrism from time to time? But yes — enrich the list with international voices! One of my favorite novels is THE PONDS OF WAGABA by Elichi Amadi… a little known gem any fan of George Eliot would love.

  • Dogyote@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    14 hours ago

    Simetimes I think the future will resemble the pre-internet era. AI content will be so easy to create that the zone will be flooded with shit, and only a few reputable sources will be trusted, like when there were only a few TV news channels.

  • Rossphorus@lemmy.world
    cake
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    20 hours ago

    Video evidence is relatively easy to fix, you just need camera ICs to cryptographically sign their outputs. If the image/video is tampered with (or even re-encoded) the signature won’t match. As the private key is (hopefully!) stored securely in the hardware IC taking the photo/video, any generated images or videos can’t be signed by such a private key.

    • IlovePizza@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Wouldn’t this be as easy to break as to point a camera at a screen playing whatever you want?

      Perhaps not with light field cameras. But then you could probably tamper with the hardware somehow.

    • topherclay@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      19 hours ago

      So whatever way the camera output is being signed, what’s stopping you from signing an altered video with a similar private key and then saying “you can all trust that my video is real because I have the private key for it.”

      The doubters will have to concede that the video did indeed come from you because it pairs with your key, but why would anyone trust that the key came from the camera step instead of coming from the editing step?

      • Taleya@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        16 hours ago

        Mate, digital cinema uses this encryption /decryption method for KDMs.

        The keys are tied into multiple physical hardware ids, many of which (such as player/.projector ) are also married cryptographically. Any deviation along a massive chain and you get no content.

        Those playback keys are produced from DKDMs that are insanely tightly controlled. The DKDM production itself even more so.

        And that’s just to play a movie. This is proven tech, decades old. You’re not gonna break it with premiere.

        • tweeks@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          10 hours ago

          But how would one simple member of the audience easily determine if this whole chain of events is valid, when they don’t even get how it works or what to look out for?

          You’d have to have a public key of trusted sources that people automatically check with their browser, but all the steps in between need to be trusted too. I can imagine it is too much of a hassle for most.

          But then again, that has always been the case for most.

        • Valmond@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          8 hours ago

          This is for restricting use, not proving authenticity of the videos recording. Anyone can spin up keys and sign videos, so in a legal battle it would be worthless.

          • Taleya@aussie.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            4 hours ago

            The technology would be extremely easy to adapt, with the certs being tied to the original recording equipment hardware. Given i don’t see a $60 ip cam having a dolphin board it would probably be relegated to much higer end equipment, but any modification with a new key would break the chain of veracity

            • Valmond@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              7 hours ago

              This is blatantly not true, it would be extremely simple to circumvent. How do you “tie” the cert to a specific hardware without trusting manufacturers? You just can’t, it’s like putting a padlock on a pizzabox.

              • Taleya@aussie.zone
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                4 hours ago

                I literally explained earlier how this exact technology is used in digital cinema dude c’mon.

                • Valmond@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  3 hours ago

                  That doesn’t mean it’s useful for forensics, IMO.

                  Edit: not saying it wont be though, just that it’s not as bullet proof as you’d think, IMO.

      • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        19 hours ago

        You can enter the camera as evidence, and prove that it has been used for other footage. Each camera should have a unique key to be effective.

        So if you create a new key, it won’t match the one on am existing camera. If you steal the key, then once that’s discovered, the camera should generate a new one.

        • tweeks@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 hours ago

          But if you don’t actually check the physical camera and prove that key for yourself, then it can easily be faked by generating a key that is not coming from the camera and is used for the “proof” video and the fake video.

      • Rossphorus@lemmy.world
        cake
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        19 hours ago

        You, the end user, don’t have access to your camera’s private key. Only the camera IC does. When your phone / SD card first receives the image/video it’s already been signed by the hardware.

  • Seth Taylor@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    1 day ago

    Actually, polls show that most people are not fond of AI-generated content and want it to be labelled or don’t want it at all.

    As for generating your own entertainment at home, see interactive movies. They did not take off because people don’t want to be “working” for their entertainment. That’s their time to relax and not make decisions.

    All in all, we’re not as careless as it may seem.

    • Taleya@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      16 hours ago

      A fb group i moderate recently had an AI jammed up it. I ran a poll to keep or disable. “Get rid of it” got more votes than the option “Put a gimp mask on it and whore it out for grapefruit”

    • I Cast Fist@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 day ago

      Not to mention those interactive movies from the early 90s games that also didn’t take off because they were sorely lacking in the game department

  • Nailbar@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    44
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    I wonder if personal websites with links to each other, like in the olden days, will start growing in popularity again because of how trust is slowly eroded for anything not in your direct control, and search engines becoming more and more useless 🤔

    • starman2112@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      34
      ·
      1 day ago

      Unironically the best greentext I ever read was the bottomless pit one written by AI

      That was like 3 years ago when generative AI was fun and whimsical

      • Fizz@lemmy.nz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 day ago

        The first ai green texts made me laugh so much. They managed to perfectly capture the essence of a green text but because they were dumb they would create the most weird situations.

      • Kogasa@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        23
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        The last time I had fun with LLMs was back when GPT2 was cutting-edge, I fine-tuned GPT2-Medium on Twitch chat logs and it alternates between emote spam, complete incoherence, blatantly unhinged comments, and suspiciously normal ones. The bot is still in use as a toy, specifically because it’s deranged and unpredictable. It’s like a kaleidoscope for the slice of internet subculture it was trained on, much more fun than a plain flawless mirror.

        • Sergio@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 day ago

          much more fun than a plain flawless mirror.

          yeah agreed! Back in the day I used to generate text for fun with n-grams and I never went higher than bigrams bc it was boring without those unexpected disfluencies. I thought of it being like an electric guitar, you want it to sound a little raw.

  • elvis_depresley@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    1 day ago

    Part of the fun of watching stuff isn’t because it “customised to me” it’s sharing an experience with the creator(s) and friends, family etc.

    I see genAI being used as a tool for creators but not as an automation of content creation.

    • rtxn@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      17 hours ago

      AI would be chronically incapable of implementing actually surprising plot twists that are both unexpected and consistent with the rest of the plot (and not somehow someone back into existence). If it hadn’t been written before, an AI would never make Darth Vader be Luke’s father unless specifically prompted, at which point, why even.

      (I’ve just finished a hexalogy marathon, my head is full of jedi.)

  • TranscendentalEmpire@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    68
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    2 days ago

    This guy bought so many rare monkey tokens. Ai is impressive in some aspects, but it’s not nearly as impressive as the marketing that drives the massive amounts of investment into it.

    The US economy is doing anything it can to create growth, which is causing investors to create a bubble around AI that is “too big to fail”.

    • fckreddit@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      41
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      “Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of a cancer cell.” - Edward Abbey.

    • Owl@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      you seem to underestimate just how fast ai is growing.

      • Lemminary@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        23 hours ago

        It’s growing fast, yes, but it’s nowhere near actually intelligent or hyperrealistic to the point it’s fooling anyone familiar with the tech.

  • ijedi1234@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 day ago

    This has already happened, many years ago. I know this because everyone but me is actually a highly sophisticated robot that resembles a member of my species. I’m onto you.

    • ddh@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      15 hours ago

      Just the kind of anthropomorphism a bot with no eyes would use 🤔

  • ᕙ(⇀‸↼‶)ᕗ@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    1 day ago

    email. gmail already summarizes every mail by default in the US. most emails are bot spam. ppl start using ai bots to answer emails. is that the internet of things?