Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

YouTube now requires to label their realistic-looking videos made using AI

blog.google

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 517 posts

Re: YouTube now requires to label their realistic-looking videos made using AI

#51

Post by dotnet00 »

jtriangle wrote: post #28
dotnet00 wrote: post #20

Without enforceability it'll go the same way as it has on Pixiv, the good actors will properly label their AI utilizing work, while the bad actors will continue to lie to try to maximize their audience until they get caught, then rinse and repeat. Kind of like crypto-scammers. For context, Pixiv had to deal with a massive wave of AI content being dumped onto the site by wannabe artists basically right as the initial…

Also remains to be seen if labeling your content as containing AI-generated work will help or hurt you in your viewership. My guess is that youtube is going to downrank this content, and may be trying to crowdsource training data in order to do this automatically.

I think that for now they're just going to use it as a means of figuring out what kind of AI-involved content people are ok with and what kind they react negatively to.

Personally, I've developed a strong aversion to content that is primarily done by AI with very little human effort on top. After how things went with Pixiv I've come to hold the belief that our societies don't help people develop 'cultural maturity'. People want the clout/respect of being a popular artist/creator, without having to go through the journey they all go through which leads to them becoming popular. It's like wanting to use the title of Doctor without putting in the effort to earn a doctorate, the difference just being that we do have a culture of thinking that it's bad to do that.

Re: YouTube now requires to label their realistic-looking videos made using AI

#53

Post by 4ndrewl »

jjcm wrote: post #37

I think it's smart to start trying things here. This has infinite flaws with it, but from a business and learnings standpoint it's a step toward the right direction. Over time we're going to both learn and decide what is and isn't important to designate as "AI" - Google's approach here at least breaks this into rules of what "AI" things are important to label: • Makes a real person appear to say or do something they…

It's to comply with the EU AI regulatory framework. This step is just additional cost they wouldn't have voluntarily burdened themselves with.

Re: YouTube now requires to label their realistic-looking videos made using AI

#54

Post by nashashmi »

summerlight wrote: post #34

Looks like there is a huge grea area that they need to figure out in practice. From https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/14328491# : Examples of content creators don’t have to disclose: * Someone riding a unicorn through a fantastical world * Green screen used to depict someone floating in space * Color adjustment or lighting filters * Special effects filters, like adding background blur or vintage effects * Pro…

Those voice overs on tiktok that are computer generated but sound quite real and often are reading some script. Do they have to disclose that those voices are artificially produced?

Re: YouTube now requires to label their realistic-looking videos made using AI

#55

Post by ajross »

the_duke wrote: post #31

They don't bother to mention it, but this is actually to comply with the the new EU AI act. > Providers will also have to ensure that AI-generated content is identifiable. Besides, AI-generated text published with the purpose to inform the public on matters of public interest must be labelled as artificially generated. This also applies to audio and video content constituting deep fakes https://digital-strategy.ec.eu…

Seems like this is sort of a manufactured argument. I mean, should every product everywhere have to cite every regulation it complies with? Your ibuprofen bottle doesn't bother to cite the FDA rules under which it was tested. Your car doesn't list the DOT as the reason it's got ABS brakes.

The EU made a rule. YouTube complied. That changes the user experience. They documented it.

Re: YouTube now requires to label their realistic-looking videos made using AI

#56

Post by Jensson »

Aardwolf wrote: post #36
summerlight wrote: post #34

Looks like there is a huge grea area that they need to figure out in practice. From https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/14328491# : Examples of content creators don’t have to disclose: * Someone riding a unicorn through a fantastical world * Green screen used to depict someone floating in space * Color adjustment or lighting filters * Special effects filters, like adding background blur or vintage effects * Pro…

> Synthetically generating music (including music generated using Creator Music) What about music made with a synthesizer?

If you manually did enough work have the copyright it is fine.

But since AI can't legally have copyright to their music Google probably wants to know for that reason.

Re: YouTube now requires to label their realistic-looking videos made using AI

#57

Post by ajross »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #46

These rules have really nothing to do with AI. They're trying to impose a ban on deceit.

That's like saying speed limit signs have really nothing to do with cars, they're trying to impose a ban on collision velocity. Which is true, but only speciously, as the rule exists only because motor vehicles made it so easy to go fast.

Re: YouTube now requires to label their realistic-looking videos made using AI

#58

Post by yoavz »

Most interesting example to me: "Digitally altering audio to make it sound as if a popular singer missed a note in their live performance".

This seems oddly specific to the inverse of what happened recently with Alicia Keys from the recent Superbowl. As Robert Komaniecki pointed out on X [1], Alicia Keys hit a "sour note" which was silently edited by the NFL to fix it.

[1] https://twitter.com/Komaniecki_R/status/1757074365102084464

Re: YouTube now requires to label their realistic-looking videos made using AI

#59

Post by dotnet00 »

dheera wrote: post #50
summerlight wrote: post #34

Looks like there is a huge grea area that they need to figure out in practice. From https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/14328491# : Examples of content creators don’t have to disclose: * Someone riding a unicorn through a fantastical world * Green screen used to depict someone floating in space * Color adjustment or lighting filters * Special effects filters, like adding background blur or vintage effects * Pro…

> * Showing a realistic depiction of a tornado or other weather events moving toward a real city that didn’t actually happen > * Making it appear as if hospital workers turned away sick or wounded patients > * Depicting a public figure stealing something they did not steal, or admitting to stealing something when they did not make that admission Considering they own the platform, why not just ban this type of content…

There are many cases where such content is perfectly fine. After all, YouTube doesn't claim to be a place devoted to non-fiction only. The first one is an especially common thing in fiction.
Post reply on HN