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

EU will mandate labels on authentic-looking AI content starting August 2

engadget.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 114 posts

Re: EU will mandate labels on authentic-looking AI content starting August 2

#61

Post by blackbear_ »

abc123abc123 wrote: post #29
HatchedLake721 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let’s stop labeling cigarettes are bad, because people will start smoking cigars and think they’re safe. Unlabeled doesn’t mean safe or legit.

Let's start labling everything. Let us label every cigarette individually, every single drinking glass, every single nail. No, people still smoke, drink and fornicate, despite all the labels. At some point, we should just let Brother Darwin sort out the thinking ones from the non-thinking ones, because at a too aggressive level of protection, society will stop working, and people will regress to children.

Labels did work in reducing harmful behaviors:

> Participants drew on a range of risk discourses in framing their abstention or moderate drinking along the lines of health, wellness, wisdom and productivity. They reiterated social constructions of heavy or regular alcohol use as irresponsible, threatening and potentially addictive.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/dar.13709

Re: EU will mandate labels on authentic-looking AI content starting August 2

#62

Post by DarkNova6 »

RandomLensman wrote: post #54
DarkNova6 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An obvious start would be that any such technology needs to have its own clearly visible watermark and removing it constitutes a crime.

Why and why would it need to be a crime? Again, we don't label machine additions, for example.

You will have to tell me how "labelling machine additions" is applicable at all as an example here. Unless your argument boils down to "computer doing things does not require labelling".

Re: EU will mandate labels on authentic-looking AI content starting August 2

#63

Post by DarkNova6 »

figassis wrote: post #60

How do you define "trying to make it look authentic"? You make a deepfake of a politician saying a discriminatory joke, and the author will just say "It was obvious this was not intended to be authentic. Anyone could see it's out of character". But the message already influenced millions.

If anything this an argument _for_ clearly labelling manipulated photos and AI generated depiction of supposedly real life events.

Re: EU will mandate labels on authentic-looking AI content starting August 2

#64

Post by DarkNova6 »

wickedsight wrote: post #20

My biggest problem with this is that this regulation is only aimed at AI. It should be much broader and include any technology that can be used to make 'authentic-looking' content. Why should someone who's good at Photoshop or VFX be allowed to share fake stuff as real, but not someone who's good with AI? For many years we've been aware that edited models on magazine covers, Instagram and in ads are negatively impact…

You completely disregard practical implications.

Can you manually create images that were done via AI? Of course you can.

Can you create AI fake content and misinformation as easily with human labor as you can with AI? No.

Understanding this distinction answers whether you see the implications AI has on the future of democracies or not.

Re: EU will mandate labels on authentic-looking AI content starting August 2

#65

Post by mosura »

zkmon wrote: post #2

Makes sense. Same as "Made in XXX" label. Users have the right to know where the product was made and how synthetic the product is.

Skip to the end. Let the consumer verify that the product is the unmodified intention of the entity claiming to have produced it and let them decide if they trust it.

Tangent: it is notable that certain variations of labelling of that sort would now be considered unacceptable by many:

https://web.archive.org.au/awa/20240617043532oe_/https://blo...

Re: EU will mandate labels on authentic-looking AI content starting August 2

#66

Post by II2II »

rsynnott wrote: post #37
mosura wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Proper authors, journalists and artists are, generally, not keen The AI Scotsman fallacy.

In this context by proper authors I mean authors published by real publishers, for a start. Generally, most are hostile to LLM writing. Also, like… why do you think people write books or make art? In the vast, vast majority of cases it is not to make money (virtually none of them do). It’s to _make_ something. Where’s the feeling of accomplishment in making them if you just told an LLM to shit something out? Like, wh…

Publishing is a business. There will be real publishers who are interested in using AI for the sake of making money. Even when a publisher has integrity and refuses to sell AI generated books, they have to contend with authors who are only interested in making money.

I'm not sure if I'm using the right term here, but publishers have been using rotating ghost writers to write series for generations and many of the authors have been happy to translate outlines into books just to earn a living. (I know of ghost written series that my father read as a child. I'm by no means young, and he had children late in life before it became fashionable to wait to have children until they were older.)

> In the vast, vast majority of cases it is not to make money (virtually none of them do).

If you're suggesting that virtually no authors write books to make money, I would suggest that is not true and the landscape is going to change for the worse. There are constraints on how many authors write books purely to make money because writing takes time and effort, with the returns being notoriously low. AI eliminates the time and effort factor. Returns don't have to be high if it is being generated by a content mill. If anything, diluting the market will result in lower returns for human authors -- discouraging them from writing in the first place.

Re: EU will mandate labels on authentic-looking AI content starting August 2

#67

Post by Yaqub_W »

dudefeliciano wrote: post #28
Yaqub_W wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there is no alternative that yields good results. Legacy media uses the argument that consumer already expects to be lied to and knows the content is for entertainment (TV news for example). I feel the same about AI content. Or should I be expected to blindly trust everything? I already have to critically think and filter everything already so why the distinction? I should try harder for some content and not…

You think that the status quo sucks and that there is no alternative, that's your prerogative. But why do you complain about people who think there is an alternative and try to implement it?

No issues with people thinking anything. Big issues with people using violence and death threats enforcing their image of the world though.

As long as it's privately or voluntarily funded and no violence or coercion is used, then I don't really care.

Re: EU will mandate labels on authentic-looking AI content starting August 2

#68

Post by Yaqub_W »

DarkNova6 wrote: post #18
Yaqub_W wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there is no alternative that yields good results. Legacy media uses the argument that consumer already expects to be lied to and knows the content is for entertainment (TV news for example). I feel the same about AI content. Or should I be expected to blindly trust everything? I already have to critically think and filter everything already so why the distinction? I should try harder for some content and not…

Nihilism is the path to death and destruction. Thinking this will makes you powerless and cedes control with those who have the most resources. It's easy to take yourself out of this equation, but it only makes everything worse. The trick is that they make you think that it couldn't get worse. But this is always false.

Can you elaborate? I have hard time seeing nihilism here. (there may be language barrier and/or definition issue at play - maybe?)

With definition of nihilism along the lines of `the rejection of all religious and moral principles, in the belief that life is meaningless`

The point I am making (or trying to) is quite the opposite. Bureaucrats seem to be introducing more violence and even more problems while resolving none. I still have to critically about the content I consume regardless of it having some label. But now tax money goes towards this instead of the things citizens voted for.

Re: EU will mandate labels on authentic-looking AI content starting August 2

#70

Post by rsynnott »

II2II wrote: post #66
rsynnott wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In this context by proper authors I mean authors published by real publishers, for a start. Generally, most are hostile to LLM writing. Also, like… why do you think people write books or make art? In the vast, vast majority of cases it is not to make money (virtually none of them do). It’s to _make_ something. Where’s the feeling of accomplishment in making them if you just told an LLM to shit something out? Like, wh…

Publishing is a business. There will be real publishers who are interested in using AI for the sake of making money. Even when a publisher has integrity and refuses to sell AI generated books, they have to contend with authors who are only interested in making money. I'm not sure if I'm using the right term here, but publishers have been using rotating ghost writers to write series for generations and many of the aut…

> they have to contend with authors who are only interested in making money.

This isn’t _really_ a thing. If you’re into writing for the money, you’re probably in the wrong business. Even some quite successful/popular authors have a day job; only a very few can support themselves on it.

Post reply on HN