151–160 of 320 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You completely misunderstood my comment. I don't understand how you could interpret it so wrongly?
I'm curious what you were aiming at?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
404 media is lying when they say any image of a man with a wood carving of a dig is stolen. Copyright does not work that way. They need to be sued into bankruptcy for defamation. AI is a wonderful tool that lets anyone creat beautiful images, and the incumbents in the image-faking field are deeply offended by that.
"Stolen" is meant colloquially, not literally let alone precise legally.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The solution is paying for content, but it's been shown over and over again that the vast majority of people won't pay for most of the content they consume.
Seems like the content market is due for a correction, then. If people are sick of toxic ads, and toxic ads pay for content, but nobody else wants to pay for the content, the content can just die and we'll figure something else out I'm sure.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is why I refuse to turn off my adblocker on YouTube, and never will. I'm not rewarding YouTube with my money (for YT Premium) for being absolutely useless at vetting their advertisers. I'd rather just not use YouTube at all if it comes to it.
You eventually get to a scale where vetting is near impossible. Paying for premium brings them closer to a state where they don’t need advertising at all.
And 100% of my YouTube ads are scams the last few weeks, many with deepfake fuckery going on. This whole side of the Web needs to be put down. The algo-feed ad-clearinghouse side. It’s a cesspit.
Twitter/X has a productive approach with Community Notes. Scam ads get noted.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is why I refuse to turn off my adblocker on YouTube, and never will. I'm not rewarding YouTube with my money (for YT Premium) for being absolutely useless at vetting their advertisers. I'd rather just not use YouTube at all if it comes to it.
You eventually get to a scale where vetting is near impossible. Paying for premium brings them closer to a state where they don’t need advertising at all.
No, that's a choice. If Youtube hired 5k qualified people to vet their ad partners properly the problem would be solved tomorrow. It's "impossible" in the sense that this would eat into their profits rather than outsourcing the misery to the consumer.
This was one of the most obvious outcomes anyone could have and should have predicted. Even when people know an image is fake, it still seems to be able to sway them. The effect we've seen over the past few years is simply likely to become worse: more polarization, more extremism, more inter-group hostility, and more BS online.
> Even when people know an image is fake, it still seems to be able to sway them. Yes, this has been happening for a long time. This is why fiction literature exists. If images we know are fake could not move our emotions, nobody would have ever laughed at a cartoon.
The AI clones are a fiction of a fiction.
I wonder if we will get to a point where the web is so saturated with this junk that the web itself starts to lose its luster. If AI can dream up a million impressive wood carvings, it seems like the real carving I saw in person is the only one that is actually interesting.
Already happening. It’s why younger generations are preferring to spend on experiences over things.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You eventually get to a scale where vetting is near impossible. Paying for premium brings them closer to a state where they don’t need advertising at all.
The largest television networks in the world haven't reached that scale yet...