131–140 of 172 posts
The dude openly admits that he posted the image "for fun", so there was clearly nefarious behavior and purposely wanted to confuse police and the investigation. I don't see why people are trying to defend this dude as him simply "posting a picture of a wolf". I guess people will defend any sort of bad behavior in this day and age.
Needs to be supported by smartphones, of course.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> the person dusturbed the operation Did they? The article says it's unclear as to their intent. > Authorities did not specify if the man had intentionally sent the photo to authorities during their search or simply shared it online.
Intent or not, it did disturb as it misslead. And .. how can one imagine not disturb a search, when posting a wrong location?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This argument has always seemed a bit silly to me. It's like responding to someone saying that it's easy to set up a hello world web server without AI with "but but but first you need to know what a web server is and how to use the command line and download a compiler/runtime and and and", as if there were some dire shortage of people who are already programmers . There are literally millions of us, the existence of…
yes but could your $RELATIVE set up a hello world web server without AI?
I don't know why people are so determined to miss the point that "people can do [image manipulation] faster with AI" does not magically mean that people weren't doing it before AI, at scale mind you. Did y'all really unironically believe EVERY single image you saw on the internet prior to the past few years was entirely real and entirely what it was presented as? My goodness
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This argument has always seemed a bit silly to me. It's like responding to someone saying that it's easy to set up a hello world web server without AI with "but but but first you need to know what a web server is and how to use the command line and download a compiler/runtime and and and", as if there were some dire shortage of people who are already programmers . There are literally millions of us, the existence of…
> There are literally millions of us And there are literally billions of everyone else. Do you not see that the amount of fake images has exploded with free access and ease of use? That’s what a tool does. It’s silly to argue generative AI doesn‘t make a difference in the proliferation of fake images, just like it’d be arguing that digital photography on a small multi-purpose device that is always with you doesn’t ma…
What I actually said couldn't be any clearer, and it's rather silly to twist my words into a strawman you can argue against.
Are you trying to tell me, in this the year of our lord 2026, somebody has been (rightfully or wrongfully) arrested for literally ‘crying wolf’? There’s something hilariously poetic about a ~2,500 year old fable being relevant today, because of AI.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> There are literally millions of us And there are literally billions of everyone else. Do you not see that the amount of fake images has exploded with free access and ease of use? That’s what a tool does. It’s silly to argue generative AI doesn‘t make a difference in the proliferation of fake images, just like it’d be arguing that digital photography on a small multi-purpose device that is always with you doesn’t ma…
> It’s silly to argue generative AI doesn‘t make a difference in the proliferation of fake images What I actually said couldn't be any clearer, and it's rather silly to twist my words into a strawman you can argue against.
I very much disagree, since you went on to make your whole point with an unrelated matter and apparently I misunderstood your point. Maybe you don’t know how to make your point clearer, but that isn’t the same as it being impossible to be clearer.
> and it's rather silly to twist my words
There was no twisting intended, and if I misconstrued your point I’d appreciate the correction (i.e. clarification).
Specifically: If you do agree that access to generative AI increases the proliferation of fake images (do you? I’m really asking. Sounds like you might), then what exactly is your objection to the original point?