Well maybe stop shoving the tech that does that down everyone’s throats? Just a thought 🤷♂️
The best solution to any problem is to go back in time to before the problem was created, sure. That cat’s so far out of the bag, and it’s only going to multiply and evolve.
I mean, yeah that’s true, but harm reduction is also a thing that exists. Usually it’s mentioned in the context of drugs, but it could easily apply here.
Interesting take, addiction to the convenience provided by AI driving the need to get more. I suppose at the end of the day it’s probably the same brain chemistry involved. I think that’s what you’re getting at?
I’m any case, this tech is only going to get better, and more commonplace. Take it, or run for the hills.
No, harm reduction would be recognizing that an object as causing harm, that people will use that object anyway, and doing what we can to minimize the harms caused by that use.
It’s less about addiction and brain chemistry than simple math. If harm is being caused, and it can be reduced, reduce it.
Ah, so more like self-harm prevention, gotcha.
I guess like any tool, whether it is help or harm depends on the user and usage.
right, so I think the person’s point was that microsoft is helping to manufacture the harm, and warning that the harm is there, but not doing much to actually reduce the harm.
Oh, right. Microsoft is a corp. They don’t care about the harm they do until it costs them money.
e: also, I love to bash on ms, but they’re not the problem here. These things are being built all over the place… In companies, in governments, in enthusiasts back yard. You can tell Microsoft, Google, Apple to stop developing the code, you can tell nvidia to stop developing cuda. It’s not going to matter.
I’m heading for the hills then. I’m perfectly capable of thinking for myself without delegating that to some chatbot.
Everyone is. As time and tech progresses, you’re going to find that it becomes increasingly difficult to avoid without going off-grid entirely.
Do you really think corps aren’t going to replace humans with AI, any later than they can profit by doing so? That states aren’t going eventually to do the same?
What we really need to do is destroy those pesky textile machines.
deleted by creator
Is that the same Microsoft company that has poured billions of dollars into that same thing they’re warning us about?
Yes, this is the “we’re the good ones” flex. And anytime they do this, there has to be a big bad boogeyman elsewhere to blame without evidence or consequence.
gun manufacturer warns that guns can kill people
Life is an equation. For a deep fake of a celebrity to be made you need 1.a celebrity, 2.a person to make the fake, 3.deep fake tech. You have to try to remove one of those from the equation to make it stop.
Except the horse is out of the bag. You cannot uninvent the technology any more than you can negate the other parts of that triangle.
global EMP strike it is
Or we can simply accept and restrict it like all the other dangerous things in our lives.
We’ve opened Pandora’s box. There’s no going back.
He also revealed that about nine months ago his team conducted a deep dive into how these groups are using AI to influence elections.
“In just the last few months, the most effective technique that’s been used by Russian actors has been posting a picture and putting a real news organization logo on that picture,” he observed. “That gets millions of shares.”
information as we know it is over, people have access to the most devilish of AI technology: Copy and Paste
wow this article is bad
I think the point was that it is easier and faster to generate that image you put the logo on than ever before, not that it was a comment on “logo inserting technology”
So the most effective thing isn’t AI, it’s literally just a 5 second copy paste job that could be done in paint?
Wonder if people will fear monger over copy/paste like they have AI?
The only solution I can think of here is cryptographic signatures. That would prove:
- the device/software in question stamped the video
- the video was unaltered since it was stamped
Individuals can also stamp their own videos so people can decide whether to trust it. Then players like YouTube, PeerTube, etc could display the stamping information.
This is low hanging fruit and should happen. All devices should cryptographically sign the video and audio they record. It’s not fool proof, a state actor could probably extract the keys and forge a signature, but it would be better than nothing.
Each device should have its own key. It’s quite difficult to hack a phone, possibly disassembling it, extract the private key from hardware, reassemble the phone, and then forge a signature on fake video. Yeah, it could happen, but if it’s a serious issue the court can inspect the phone the video allegedly came from and at least for normal people, they aren’t going to be able to forge a signed video.
If we get serious about this devices could have security hardware that is difficult for even state-level actors to break.
As others have said, people will still believe what they want though. With or without fake videos and even with and without evidence.
That’s true, but the more transparent and obvious the evidence against misinformation, the more people will disregard it. You’ll always get the gullible minority that’ll believe in whatever conspiracy, but democracy doesn’t hinge on them, it hinges on the quiet majority.
That said, this should be done in a privacy respecting way. You should be able to choose not to have your videos signed, not to associate that signature with a given account, and to supply your own signing key. Device resets should reset the key as well. There should also be a mechanism to associate multiple devices as coming from the same source, while distinguishing between devices (so if one device is compromised, only those videos are suspect).
I think it could be done pretty unobtrusively, and it should start as a standard for journalism before going to the broader public.
I think one of the biggest issues is even if you come up with a way to verify what is and isn’t AI generated, it might not actually matter. Already we’ve seen people just believing the most obviously fake posts, cause they’re just that gullible. Like yes we should come up with a system to verify things, but I fear the genie is already out of the bottle.
Well, you can’t fix stupid. Fortunately, there are enough not-stupid people that tooling can help fuel a misinformation correction campaign. The more transparent the edits are, the easier it is to fact check.
Removed by mod
Didn’t Microsoft literally make a deepfake detector just a few months ago?
Did anyone else think nuclear power trio when they saw the pic?
I feel like people are actually less worried about election misinformation than before, because for misinformation to affect an election, you need an election that is able to be affected by information.
Or in the case of this pic, easily disturbing.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
As hundreds of millions of voters around the globe prepare to elect their leaders this year, there’s no question that trolls will try to sway the outcomes using AI, according to Clint Watts, general manager of Microsoft’s Threat Analysis Center.
Watts said his team spotted the first Russian social media account impersonating an American ten years ago.
Initially, Redmond’s threat hunters (using Excel, of course) tracked Russian trolls testing their fake videos and images on locals, then moving on to Ukraine, Syria and Libya.
Watts’ team tracks government-linked threat groups from Russia, Iran, China, plus other nations around the world, he explained.
He also revealed that about nine months ago his team conducted a deep dive into how these groups are using AI to influence elections.
Videos set in public with a well-known speaker at a rally or an event attended by a large group of people are harder to fake.
The original article contains 624 words, the summary contains 151 words. Saved 76%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
I like that they choose the least convincing fake pictures. Its not really helping their argument.
The article is about faked images, so it makes sense they’d make the thumbnail image appear fake at a glance.
