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

YouTube to automatically label AI-generated videos

blog.youtube

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

831–840 of 881 posts

Re: YouTube to automatically label AI-generated videos

#831

Post by Timwi »

konschubert wrote: post #766
dmos62 wrote: post #652

Children and seniors are victimized by AI content on a huge scale. Regular adults like most of us here don't ever get such videos in their feeds. I saw kids spend many hours a day watching automatically generated videos. Not always AI-generated, sometimes it's AI-assisted and procedurally generated. It is quite unbelievable how vulnerable weaker minds, for the lack of a better term, are to AI content. I saw a group o…

This isn’t a response to you, but just so it has been said: 3 to 8-year-old kids have no business being on YouTube alone. AI or not.

I agree, but only because YouTube is a wild west of trash, not because children somehow don't deserve to be entertained. I think that distinction should be made. Instead of focusing on barring children from the bad stuff, it might be worth trying to attract them to the good stuff. (I hear PBS Kids is a good app to leave your child alone with. No personal experience of my own though.)

Re: YouTube to automatically label AI-generated videos

#832

Post by mikhailfranco »

spullara wrote: post #227
ellrob88 wrote: post #139

Curious to see if this will apply to music. YouTube seems to be filled with AI music these days - just do a search for "focus music" or the like, and you'll see creators pushing new 1-hr tracks every few days with no mention of where the music came from or the fact it is AI generated. People praising it in the comments seem none the wiser (or perhaps they're also bots).

A friend of mine who is a very non-technical dermatologist listens exclusively to Suno songs she made. All in genres and styles of songs from her era, the 80s and 90s. Who else is going to make new songs for her? New music almost always targets young people.

A long-form critique of Suno by a musician/producer:

Suno, AI Music, and the Bad Future | Adam Neely

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U8dcFhF0Dlk

A detailed philosophical discussion of his point=of-view:

AI Music is Not Music - Adam Neely | Alex O'Connor

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sbv0iX_EyLM

Re: YouTube to automatically label AI-generated videos

#833

Post by HeartStrings »

dmos62 wrote: post #652

Children and seniors are victimized by AI content on a huge scale. Regular adults like most of us here don't ever get such videos in their feeds. I saw kids spend many hours a day watching automatically generated videos. Not always AI-generated, sometimes it's AI-assisted and procedurally generated. It is quite unbelievable how vulnerable weaker minds, for the lack of a better term, are to AI content. I saw a group o…

Elderly fall for slop due to bad vision and bad hearing.

Re: YouTube to automatically label AI-generated videos

#834

Post by NexRebular »

vlunkr wrote: post #242
spullara wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A friend of mine who is a very non-technical dermatologist listens exclusively to Suno songs she made. All in genres and styles of songs from her era, the 80s and 90s. Who else is going to make new songs for her? New music almost always targets young people.

There are millions of people making music in an ever-expanding set of genres. The idea that no one is making 80s or 90s style music is absurd. I guess she can listen to slop but maybe just look around a little instead? Edit: slop not slob

> The idea that no one is making 80s or 90s style music is absurd

You can see new releases almost daily on e.g. NewRetroWave[0].

[0] https://www.youtube.com/newretrowave

Re: YouTube to automatically label AI-generated videos

#835

Post by solumunus »

cynicalpeace wrote: post #825
solumunus wrote: post #718

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ours conditionally get extremely limited and supervised screen time. I feel this is the way to do it.

Hm, what do you mean by "extremely limited and supervised"? I think absolute 0 is best for as long as possible. If you never introduce them to the drug, they'll never have the craving for it. That's obviously difficult, practically, and we like movies, so we'll watch about a movie a week... but even I feel that is too much.

They’re 4 and 3, currently it’s probably 30 minutes every other week for the older one. She doesn’t really ask for it yet, just a treat when we feel like it. We’ll also use them on the odd occasion we’re doing long travel.

If you’re including regular TV, sounds like you are, they watch significantly more of that. At least some daily. I don’t think it’s nearly as damaging or addictive compared to phone/pad. It barely holds their attention a lot of the time and they would rather play.

Re: YouTube to automatically label AI-generated videos

#836

Post by ManuelKiessling »

gregschlom wrote: post #744
jb1991 wrote: post #728

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Now I am super curious, I really need to see an example of one of these videos!

Here's a representative example that my father in law (in his 70s) shared with me the other day: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=puRg-4ZvNYs

Crazy. On mobile it’s relatively easy to grab the playhead and scrub back and forth quickly over the full length of the video — this shows how the face movements are totally repetitive and constrained to a very limited space and variety.

Re: YouTube to automatically label AI-generated videos

#837

Post by anshorei »

autoexec wrote: post #620
ArcaneMoose wrote: post #390

Earlier quoted context omitted.

More scenarios: - AI generated VFX on top of non-AI video - AI upscaling of low res footage - AI frame interpolation for synthetic slow-mo - Modified / composited AI video - Footage created by "Extend Scene" features in Premiere Pro and others - Word correction from tools like Descript - AI relighting or colorization - Reaction video to a video containing AI-generated content And in general, what amount of combinatio…

All of them in any amount and yes, your specific 3 seconds should be labeled as being AI generated in your video (or description) and your entire video should be labeled as made using AI by youtube. A 30 minute speech by a president where I use AI to change 3 seconds in order to make that person say something they never did should also get the label. The label shouldn't be about how much AI was used, but that it was…

Why does this mean AI-aided color correction, 25fps to 30fps, or upscaling 480p to 1080p should be treated the same? Using AI to make someone say something different (even if only for a small part of the video) is very clearly different, that's deception. Why does AI editing 3 seconds of audio from a president's speech be treated different from when a human does it without AI?

It sounds like your argument is about deceptive editing. Why not just require labelling deceptive editing? That way there can be place for comedy channels to do so for comedic purpose (rather than blanket ban on deceptive edits).

Almost any photograph taken with a mobile phone is AI edited because phones come with AI to enhance photo quality (e.g. Deep Fusion, Smart HDR), should any photo taken with a mobile camera be labelled AI now?

Re: YouTube to automatically label AI-generated videos

#838

Post by notrealyme123 »

textadventure wrote: post #813
notrealyme123 wrote: post #437

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just don't see any reason to actively search for a problem. Yes it's new technology and contradicts "the old ways". People have made music before, and I hardly believe they only made It for other people, but als themselves.

The technology aspect of it is not the problem. You can use the underlying technology of it in any number of ways, some of which could even be artistic. We are talking about people who rather generate some random Suno songs instead of just searching for some playlists of which there are thousands upon thousands. There is something deeply dystopian about that. Extrapolate this idea for a second: 10, 20 years from now,…

I understand your points and I think there is a chance of this going wrong. Especially with the current incentive structure behind it. I personally hate smartphones because the incentive there is to get people's attention and sell it.

But without this incentives I could imagine a future where Smartphones where actually good and have a more positive impact.

But back to culture. I don't see the problem of people listening to their own created music. Even now a lot of people make e.g great photos just for them selves. As long as we don't force people to do so that's fine in my books.

Still if the incentives are bad, this can go very go wrong in very distopian ways.

Re: YouTube to automatically label AI-generated videos

#839

Post by marc_g »

saltyoldman wrote: post #782
gregschlom wrote: post #744

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's a representative example that my father in law (in his 70s) shared with me the other day: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=puRg-4ZvNYs

I hate that I opened that in my main account, it's weird AF. Goes off to edit YT history to hope that click didn't affect my alg.

Absolutely regret just doing the same thing.

Re: YouTube to automatically label AI-generated videos

#840

Post by fragmede »

crdrost wrote: post #765
isoprophlex wrote: post #759

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That indeed, and The Entertainment or the samizdat from Infinite Jest. A film so entertaining to its viewers that they become lifeless, losing all interest in anything other than endless viewings of the film.

Back when people would read blog posts about the erosion of ownership in the face of intellectual property law, I used to blog about something similar... Of course the MPAA is against copying, I would say -- the ideal situation for the MPAA would be if when you left the theater, they could just wipe your brain of the memory of the film you just watched. You just remember that you had a fun time with your friends and…

that's pretty interesting. Ever consider writing a book?
Post reply on HN