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

501–510 of 517 posts

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

#501

Post by AnthonyMouse »

speff wrote: post #274
pixl97 wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Youtube isn't some mom n' pop operation At a mom and pop you could at least talk to a person and figure out what happen. >I don't deal in "well this _could_ lead to this" Did you not learn from the entire DMCA thing? Remember the thing where piles tech people warned "Wow, this is going to be used as a weapon to cause problems" and then it was used as a weapon to cause problems. Well, welcome to the next weapon that…

The DMCA implementation implemented is the only thing that saved youtube from getting sued out of existence. And people on the internet don't know what fair-use actually means, so they complain/exaggerate about DMCA takedowns when, surprise, it wasn't actually covered by fair-use. There's a handful of cases where yt actually messed up w/ DMCA and considering the sheer volume of videos they process, I'd say it's actua…

> The DMCA implementation implemented is the only thing that saved youtube from getting sued out of existence.

The alternative to the DMCA is Section 230 of the CDA, which could have just as easily been applied to copyright as it is to anything else if it weren't for the DMCA providing a more abuse-prone alternative.

> And people on the internet don't know what fair-use actually means, so they complain/exaggerate about DMCA takedowns when, surprise, it wasn't actually covered by fair-use.

Abusive takedowns are a huge problem, actually. It's common in cases of businesses sending takedowns for their competitors' websites or videos, for example. They're often completely fraudulent with no merit whatsoever, but the company receiving the takedown has no information on which to base a decision (who created this content? how would they know?), so they just mechanistically execute all of them with no validation.

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

#502

Post by AnthonyMouse »

tsimionescu wrote: post #399
eek2121 wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For all the folks that bash the United States for "reasons" this one gave me a chuckle. Our handling of privacy and data and such is absolute ass, but at least we *can* hide our data from big government with little repercussion in most cases (translation: you aren't actively being investigated for a crime that a judge isn't aware of) Of course that says nothing about the issues of corruption of judges in the court sy…

> We should have been working together 60 years ago for a viable off-planet colony and related stuff. If the world ended tomorrow, humanity would cease to exist. You need over 100,000 people to sustain the human race in the event a catastrophic event wipes almost everyone out. We are hundreds of years away from the kind of technology you would need for a viable fully self-sustainable off-world colony that houses 100k…

> Nuclear wars, the worse bio-engineered weapons, super volcanoes - it's much, much easier to create tech that would allow us to survive and thrive after all of these than it is to create tech for humans to survive on a frozen irradiated dusty planet with next to no atmosphere.

This is the best argument I've heard for why we should do it. Once you can survive on Mars you've created the technology to survive whatever happens on Earth.

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

#503

Post by washadjeffmad »

While in the waiting room of my doctor's office, I noticed a few elderly patients playing videos of an obviously AI Joe Biden promising them free money and promoting a familiarly Trump platform, and they were /discussing/ it, as if it was real.

Who manufactured the problem here? It isn't just that these systems exist solely for individuals to be selected for by vulnerability, but that the people best poised to protect them are so effectively excluded from any sign of it.

What would it look like if we could see every ad meant for every audience from the same companies? What if we could just look up who was trying to target us? Is responsible, auditable advertisement impossible, or just not able to print money?

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

#504

Post by KETpXDDzR »

Great, now bad actors can label child pornography as AI-generated to avoid legal consequences.

This label is worthless IMO. We're close or already at a point where it's impossible to distinguish between real and AI generated content. Any company offering "AI detection" are scammers. It's just plain not possible.

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

#505

Post by canadianfella »

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…

[dead]

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

#506

Post by etskinner »

nuz wrote: post #441
xarope wrote: post #373

Earlier quoted context omitted.

* Digitally altering audio to make it sound as if a popular singer missed a note in their live performance Does all the autotuning that singers use in live performance counts? /j

Interestingly they only say you have to disclose it if it's a singer missing a note. Seems like it's fair game to fix a note that was off key in real life and not disclose that.

That was only an example, not a rule. Presumably you need to label it if you fix the note too

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

#507

Post by parthianshotgun »

shafyy wrote: post #407
eek2121 wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For all the folks that bash the United States for "reasons" this one gave me a chuckle. Our handling of privacy and data and such is absolute ass, but at least we *can* hide our data from big government with little repercussion in most cases (translation: you aren't actively being investigated for a crime that a judge isn't aware of) Of course that says nothing about the issues of corruption of judges in the court sy…

> I am really super surprised that basic survival needs are NOT on the table when we are all arguing about religion, abortion, guns, etc. Like really? Most people in the world struggle to feed themselves and their families. This is the basic survival need. Do you think they fucking care what happens to humantiy in 100k years? Stop drinking that transhumanism kool-aid, give your windows a good cleaning and look at wha…

The transhumanist/effective altruism types really do a great service in making me chuckle. I wonder where that attitude comes from, lack of community?

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

#508

Post by Capricorn2481 »

dormento wrote: post #444
xarope wrote: post #373

Earlier quoted context omitted.

* Digitally altering audio to make it sound as if a popular singer missed a note in their live performance Does all the autotuning that singers use in live performance counts? /j

IMHO, not even a /j. Under the current guidelines, doesn't all music performances that make use of some sort of pitch correction assist are technically "digitally altered"?

What about autotune is AI?

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

#509

Post by themoonisachees »

hobo_in_library wrote: post #490
HlessClaudesman wrote: post #414

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Porn classification / regulation boils down to: "I'll know it when I see it." Implying the existence of some hyper vigilant seer who can heroically determine what we should keep behind the video storre curtain of dencey, as if no grey areas exist. This also has the problem of requiring actual unbiased humans to view and accurately assess everything, which of course does not scale. Perhaps AI classification is the mir…

> We could conceivably use good AI to spot the bad AI I suspect this is Google's actual goal with the tagging system. It's not so much about helping users, rather it's a way to collect labeled data which they can later use to train their own "AI detection" algorithms

The volunteers who trained their subtitles generating mod without the knowledge that this was the ultimate goal know this.

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

#510

Post by themoonisachees »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #65
jjcm wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One black hat thing I'm curious about though is whether or not this tag can be weaponized. If I upload a real event and tag it as AI, will it reduce user trust that the real event ever happened?

The AI tags are fundamentally useless. The premise is that it would prevent someone from misleading you by thinking that something happened when it didn't, but someone who wants to do that would just not tag it then. Which is where the real abuse comes in: You post footage of a real event and they say it was AI, and ban you for it etc., because what actually happened is politically inconvenient. And the only way to p…

The do have some use. Take for example the AI images of the pope wearing luxury brands that someone made about last year. They clearly wanted to make it as a joke, not to purposefully misinform people, and as long as everybody is in on the joke then I see no issue with that. But some people who weren't aware of current AIgen capabilities took it as real and an AI tag would have avoided the discussion of "has AI art gone too far" while still allowing that person to make their joke.
Post reply on HN