• @ssm@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    50
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    Hello, I have downvoted your post!

    Reasons include:

    • stupid fucking clickbait title
    • sharing information that was otherwise already obvious to everyone for the past 2 years
    • quoting elon musk they’re actually denigrating elon and I can’t read lol
    • @Ilandar@aussie.zoneOP
      link
      fedilink
      13
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      The title is not mine and the paper the article is responding to was published last month, not two years ago as you claim. The only mention of Musk in the entire article is in this one sentence:

      Unlike self-serving warnings from Open AI CEO Sam Altman or Elon Musk about the “existential risk” artificial general intelligence poses to humanity, Google’s research focuses on real harm that generative AI is currently causing and could get worse in the future.

    • TehPers
      link
      fedilink
      English
      115 months ago

      Not sure if you’re aware so I’ll mention it anyway, but as far as I know, downvotes in Beehaw communities don’t federate to Beehaw (as in aren’t applied here - you might see them on your instance though, not really sure). That being said, your comment does, so you’ve made a “pseudo-downvote” anyway.

      • Norah - She/They
        link
        fedilink
        English
        95 months ago

        The mechanism for how it works is that as a remote instance sends in it’s downvote count, Beehaw immediately drops the message without modifying the database. Part of this exchange is an expected response of the total updated downvotes. However, Beehaw sends back “0” and the remote instance knows it can’t be zero, so it treats it’s local count with higher validity.

        Essentially, this all ends up meaning that what ssm will see is the total of all downvotes from users on their own instance, and nothing else. This might be just their own downvote, especially being on a smaller instance. But I’ve seen lemmy.world users be confused about it bc the count they see is say, -5. Have been told my instance obviously has them enabled 😅

        Remote instances don’t communicate their vote tally’s with each other for a third instance’s post.

        • AwesomeLowlander
          link
          fedilink
          35 months ago

          “Sam Altman or Elon Musk about the “existential risk” artificial general intelligence poses to humanity”

          The full quote is “UNLIKE self-serving warnings from Sam Altman or Elon Musk about the “existential risk” artificial general intelligence poses to humanity”. In other words, they’re actively denigrating Musk and Altman, and you’ve taken the quote entirely out of context, in direct opposite to the original meaning.

  • @KevonLooney@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    185 months ago

    generative AI makes it very easy for anyone to flood the internet with generated text, audio, images, and videos.

    And? There’s already way too much data online to read or watch all of it. We could just move to a “watermark” system where everyone takes credit for their contributions. Things without watermarks could just be dismissed, since they have as much authority as an anonymous comment.

    • @Pheonixdown@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      125 months ago

      I am waiting for people to start getting both public and hidden authentication tattoos, so they can prove generative images aren’t actually them.

      • @jarfil@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        35 months ago

        How would that work?

        AIs learn from existing images, they could just as well learn to reproduce a tattoo and link the pattern to a person’s name. Recreating it from different angles, would require more training data, but ultimately would get there.

        • @Pheonixdown@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          45 months ago

          For public ones, depending on what people started getting, it’d really strain the AIs. You could go in like 1 or two ways, probably different people getting both.

          Something very uniform but still unique, like a QR code kind of deal, AIs would hallucinate the crap out of that. Or abstractions, like people do to change the way the shape of their face to combat facial recognition.

          For private ones, just don’t ever get it photographed, any image showing that area without it would be probably fake.

        • @Imacat@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          95 months ago

          Mid journey and the like have already been caught creating shutterstock watermarks in images. Future models might be able to fake specific watermarks well.

          • @KevonLooney@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            55 months ago

            Not like that. A server name that can be authenticated. Like when you receive an email from your bank (in the metadata), you know it’s legitimate. Each organization can set up their own server to host things they vouch for. With ActivityPub it can be viewed elsewhere with the guarantee that it’s from a trusted source.

              • @niucllos@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                55 months ago

                Sure, but so do a lot of other things that aren’t as costly. If NFTs were the first secure way to authenticate things online we wouldn’t have had online banking until very recently

                • @Imacat@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  35 months ago

                  True but trust is hard to establish in decentralized platforms like the fediverse. As far as I’m aware the only decentralized banking is unfortunately cryptocurrency.

      • Norah - She/They
        link
        fedilink
        English
        35 months ago

        (because “save as” isn’t available on “modern” websites)

        I think this is also more of a mobile issue with apps more than just websites. Like, hence why those screenshots are so often from phones. Generally one’s that are more obviously from a computer are social media posts, presumedly to facilitate sharing on other platforms easier.

        Because on desktop, even if a website doesn’t allow it, using the dev inspector usually allows you too. I wonder if it would be possible to create an extension/userscript that automates that on hostile websites.

      • Match!!
        link
        fedilink
        English
        25 months ago

        but if we all join hands and sing this song, then our call will reach the sky…

      • @KevonLooney@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        55 months ago

        Why would anyone pay for the service? Having a “name” is free, and that dumb worldcoin only works for people. It can’t work for governments or businesses.

        ActivityPub is actually a good way to authenticate things. If an organization vouches for something they can post it on their server and it can be viewed elsewhere.

        • @jarfil@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          15 months ago

          I think the idea of WorldCoin is to have a “wallet” linked to a single physical person, then you can sign any work with your key, that you got by proving you are a real person.

          IMHO, the coin part is just a hype element to get people to sign up for the password part.

          As for ActivityPub, I don’t see how it helps with anything. An organization vouching for something, can already post it on their web, or if they want a distributed system, post it on IPFS.

  • 🇰 🌀 🇱 🇦 🇳 🇦 🇰 ℹ️
    link
    fedilink
    English
    11
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    We didn’t even have AI when the Internet became flooded with faked images and videos, and those actually are incredibly hard to tell are fake. AI generated images still has very obvious tells that it’s fake if you scrutinize them even a little bit. And video is so bad right now, you don’t have to do anything but have functioning sight to notice it’s not real.

    • Match!!
      link
      fedilink
      English
      35 months ago

      AI generated images have obvious tells to us who are capable of medium levels of scrutiny, but we can expect them to be harder to tell over time

  • @its_me_xiphos@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    55 months ago

    I’m not reading the article but instead trying to be amusing. If it breaks the reality, please put me in a new one with really good scotch, healthy knees, and a spirit of adventure!

  • @jarfil@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    45 months ago

    Not sure what to make out of this article. The statistics are nice to know, but something like this seems poorly investigated:

    AI overview answers in Google search that tell users to eat glue

    Google’s AI has a strength others lack: not only it allows users to rate an answer, but it can also use Google’s search data to check whether people are laughing at or mocking its results.

    The “fire breathing swans”, the “glue on pizza”, or the “gasoline flavored spaghetti”, have disappeared from Google’s AI.

    Gemini now also uses a draft system where it reviews and refines its own initial answer several times, before presenting the final result.

  • @tardigrada@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    3
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    I haven’t read this article as the statement is simply wrong. AI is just a technology. What it does (and doesn’t) depends on how it is used, and this in turn depends on human decision making.

    What Google does here is -once again- denying responsibilty. If I’d be using a tool that says you should put glue on your pizza, then it’s me who is responsible, not the tool. It’s not the weapon that kilks, it’s the human being who pulls the trigger.