Humans aren’t mentally ready for an AI-saturated ‘post-truth world’ • Hacker News Board

Re: Humans aren’t mentally ready for an AI-saturated ‘post-truth world’

#541

Post by GoblinSlayer » Fri, Jun 23, 2023, 9:35 AM UTC

bcrl wrote: post #401

machina_ex_deus wrote: post #383

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Disinformation is the narrative constructed by crumbling authorities of mainstream media desperately trying to preserve their power. You might think like their narrative is "think critically, and consider everything critically". But the actual message is, your fellow humans are stupid, they fall for misinformation and fake sources. Ignore all alternative sources of information and most importantly, do not trust your…

Well, yesterday Youtube served me up an ad for an "AI" algorithmic trading service "only available to Canadians" and "backed by Elon Musk. It used "AI" generated audio and video of Musk to peddle an unregistered securities trading firm that tries to prey on the uninformed. That video is clearly disinformation / misinformation. There is zero chance that video would be played on a conventional broadcaster. Why? They ha…

>On the other hand, platforms are unaccountable and unwilling to act in the public interest.

Broadcasters don't act in the public interest either, they act in owner's interest.

Re: Humans aren’t mentally ready for an AI-saturated ‘post-truth world’

#542

Post by GoblinSlayer » Fri, Jun 23, 2023, 9:44 AM UTC

bcrl wrote: post #455

listenallyall wrote: post #452

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are conflating an advertisement -- a separate category, which normal people and regulators recognize as often being deceptive and manipulative -- with "news," including statements from current and formal government officials, and even testimony in courts and congressional hearings. Advertisements are often total bullshit (and I would likely consider anything created by AI to almost certainly be), but that is an e…

Until recently, it was costly to fake a video of someone talking. Recent advances in generative AI have changed that. One definition for disinformation is "deliberately misleading or biased information; manipulated narrative or facts; propaganda". The ad I viewed meets that qualification. This was not your typical advertisement trying to persuade the viewer that their product is better than others. It used a generate…

>Until recently, it was costly to fake a video of someone talking.

Due to which Tom Cruise talking in an ad had bigger impact.

Re: Humans aren’t mentally ready for an AI-saturated ‘post-truth world’

#543

Post by GoblinSlayer » Fri, Jun 23, 2023, 9:56 AM UTC

bcrl wrote: post #518

listenallyall wrote: post #467

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that the AI generated stuff is fucked up. What I'm pointing out is that an advertisement is expected to be biased and not necessarily tethered to "facts." It's why magazines and social media platforms require (or are supposed to) ads and paid content to be marked as such. GM doesn't claim that Ford is spreading "disinformation" -- but newspapers, TV stations, politicians, etc do constantly claim that people w…

The difference is that ads in magazines, newspapers and on TV are curated by humans, so that the kind of clearly illegal and unethical ads peddled by platforms never get published. Free speech comes with the obligation of responsibility. You can't go around yelling "Fire!" in a theatre because of the clearly obvious possible negative consequences of that action. Legacy mainstream media appear to understand that bette…

If curators blocked one unethical ad, it doesn't mean they block other unethical ads. Even worse, unethical ads they didn't block are assumed to be ethical. Who curates the curators?

Re: Humans aren’t mentally ready for an AI-saturated ‘post-truth world’

#544

Post by Aerbil313 » Fri, Jun 23, 2023, 11:09 AM UTC

GoblinSlayer wrote: post #520

Aerbil313 wrote: post #421

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We CAN’T adapt. There are no biological mechanisms inside your head to adapt to Tiktok. There are plenty of mechanisms which make you an addict to it, though.

You can trivially adapt to tiktok by seeing no reason in it and not using it. That's what I do. I don't even know what it is and does. Is it per chance yet another social network?

As an individual you can “adapt” by abstaining. You can eat %100 healthily, no junk food, exercise everyday, get enough sunlight, not use screens at a close distance to avoid myopia, not use social media, avoid microplastics and forever-chemicals (tip: you can’t), escape climate change caused unnatural disasters, and buy air quality control products to try to get to a fraction of the air quality of a rural village in 1500s. Yet here we are, talking about obese nations. Technology is never neutral when combined with human nature (when used by humans). It’s always unnatural, because our bodies and minds are not designed (or evolved if you believe in that) for this modern world. And this incompatibility almost always leads to unhealthiness, both mental and physical.

See my comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36426276

Re: Humans aren’t mentally ready for an AI-saturated ‘post-truth world’

#545

Post by bcrl » Fri, Jun 23, 2023, 2:36 PM UTC

GoblinSlayer wrote: post #543

bcrl wrote: post #518

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The difference is that ads in magazines, newspapers and on TV are curated by humans, so that the kind of clearly illegal and unethical ads peddled by platforms never get published. Free speech comes with the obligation of responsibility. You can't go around yelling "Fire!" in a theatre because of the clearly obvious possible negative consequences of that action. Legacy mainstream media appear to understand that bette…

If curators blocked one unethical ad, it doesn't mean they block other unethical ads. Even worse, unethical ads they didn't block are assumed to be ethical. Who curates the curators?

So your argument is that making rules is hard so we shouldn't make rules?

The bare minimum standard of ethical behaviour is to not do things that harm other people. The ads I am referring to meet the test of causing harm to people that act based on the content presented. Plus they violate securities laws. It's pretty cut and dry for that case.

Re: Humans aren’t mentally ready for an AI-saturated ‘post-truth world’

#546

Post by carlosjobim » Fri, Jun 23, 2023, 5:46 PM UTC

forgetfreeman wrote: post #537

carlosjobim wrote: post #530

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suggest you botanize a little in early and mid 20th century TV and radio broadcasts from around the world. You will find propaganda where the presenters are literally screaming like lunatics at the listener: Telling children to turn in their parents to the secret police, calling for war - and worse. That is what the majority of the population of the world had to listen to and watch. Mass media propaganda on the air…

I can absolutely compare that to online conversations as they have lead to at least one attempt to overthrow the US government and have convinced an alarming minority of armed citizens that lizard people are real and pose a threat to the children of the world. That propaganda has always existed is not in question, what you fail to address in your response is the caustic effects on society caused by the proliferation…

I apologize, but if you think those things are comparable there is no way we can have any kind of fruitful conversation. Our values and perspectives are too different.

Re: Humans aren’t mentally ready for an AI-saturated ‘post-truth world’

#547

Post by vba616 » Sat, Jun 24, 2023, 2:20 AM UTC

synetic wrote: post #501

vba616 wrote: post #484

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>A person not trained in virology or microbiology is absolutely unqualified to discern the difference between good information and bad information on the topic of vaccines. It seems hard to argue with that...but what exactly is the meaning of saying people are "absolutely unqualified" to do something which they in fact do constantly and which there is no obvious alternative in order for society to function? If we acc…

It seems hard to argue with that...but what exactly is the meaning of saying people are "absolutely unqualified" to do something which they in fact do constantly and which there is no obvious alternative in order for society to function? In my opinion the answer is this. Roughly speaking, in general: Overwhelming expert consensus opinion on a topic has a much higher chance of being correct than any contrary belief I…

"Overwhelming expert consensus" implies that you know who is an expert so I don't see how it helps an idealized clueless average citizen who arguendo cannot judge accurate information from mis- or dis- information.

Also, you have heard of "100 Autoren Gegen Einstein"? Obviously people who bring that up in an actual conflict of ideas are almost certainly not Einstein, but how do we know, and if we think we know who is right and it is the majority, how do we refute the claim that polls don't determine truth?

Re: Humans aren’t mentally ready for an AI-saturated ‘post-truth world’

#548

Post by forgetfreeman » Sat, Jun 24, 2023, 6:12 AM UTC

carlosjobim wrote: post #546

forgetfreeman wrote: post #537

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can absolutely compare that to online conversations as they have lead to at least one attempt to overthrow the US government and have convinced an alarming minority of armed citizens that lizard people are real and pose a threat to the children of the world. That propaganda has always existed is not in question, what you fail to address in your response is the caustic effects on society caused by the proliferation…

I apologize, but if you think those things are comparable there is no way we can have any kind of fruitful conversation. Our values and perspectives are too different.

It's likely an issue of perspective. One of the benefits of being 50 years old is I've watched this entire process unwind in real time.