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

71–80 of 114 posts

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

#71

Post by RandomLensman »

DarkNova6 wrote: post #62
RandomLensman wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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".

That is mostly my argument. I find "computer doing things" generally not a useful category and why here specifically doesn't have enough support. If there are some truly high risk gaps, then why no close them specifically?

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

#72

Post by lelanthran »

RandomLensman wrote: post #11
lelanthran wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am seeing more and more this exact sentiment that is in this comment: "I should be able to bamboozled everyone into thinking I have skills I actually don't have anymore". Look, there's a ton of places where you can display your AI code, products or comments. Why is it so damn important that no places remain for people who want to be aware of whether or not they are engaging with a human? Why is it so important to y…

My suspicion is that it will quickly not matter in a lot 9f situations for most users, customers, etc. - so might be easier and better to curate places of true human interaction, for example, instead of the other way around.

The outcome will be that places insisting on human content will become more valuable, not less.

Even the most ardent AI booster wants their slop to be viewed by human eyeballs, ironically.

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

#73

Post by kmfrk »

xyzsparetimexyz wrote: post #46

Surely a better idea would be to focus on how we can idk, get camera firmware to cryptographically sign photos or somethin, and then have editing software apply a signature on top. Or at least encourage a system where theres a good chain of image provenance for photojournalists

People have already tried this with C2PA, and it's not a perfect system. The main problem with these systems is that you risk certifying fake media, which is worse than uncertified fake and real media.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40313769

I do wish more people used basic watermarks on their media regardless - as in sloppy ffmpeg text. People are more likely to repurpose other people's older media than generate new media, and old time-y watermarks make that just slightly harder. Maybe a free app for uploading citizen journalism media that handles the watermarking with geo- and datemarking is the way to go.

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

#74

Post by LelouBil »

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.

Look at the written law.

I found this definition here :

> ... who use an AI system to generate or manipulate image, audio or video content that appreciably resembles existing persons, objects, places, entities or events and would falsely appear to a person to be authentic or truthful (deep fakes)

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1689/oj/eng

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

#75

Post by II2II »

rsynnott wrote: post #70
II2II wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

My apologies for a lack of clarity in that sentence, but I meant that publishers have to contend with people who are willing to use generative AI to make money by writing books for them.

That said, real people write for all sorts of reasons. Money is definitely one of them. Sometimes it is out of ignorance (e.g. they don't know that few books earn much money). Sometimes it is out of delusion (e.g. some authors are clearly raking in the money, they think they will too).

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

#76

Post by mcv »

DarkNova6 wrote: post #63
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.

Yes, but without exceptions for satire and parody etc.

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

#77

Post by cyanydeez »

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.

the law will allow normal broadcast outlets to filter; so some of that will just be the pipeline.

If you're talking about twitter, then yeah, that's a firehose of crap and there's no laws that'll stop the "owww, it was just a joke!"

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

#78

Post by johneth »

II2II wrote: post #43
Dfol wrote: post #21

It won't work. Most of the media you see in the near future (if not already) is going to be at least AI assisted. They're going to be overloaded by reports of AI generation not labeled as AI. I'm also curious, what about AI assisted media? If a company writes a full article, then uses AI to edit it a bit, does that need to be labeled?

I agree it won't work, albeit for an entirely different reason. There has been a shift towards labelling AI generated or AI assisted content by those who aren't attempting to mislead. Those who are attempting to mislead won't. As for AI assisted edits, the article is quite clear about the labelling covering AI generated content. If you "hire" the AI as an editor by asking it to check your grammar or point out weak ar…

> Those who are attempting to mislead won't.

Sure, but this mandate means that if they're caught (which isn't unlikely), they can be fined up to 3% of revenue (not profit). Many will be outside the EU's jurisdiction, but not all. Taken together, this will have a chilling effect, not stopping it entirely, but likely reducing it.

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

#80

Post by Tade0 »

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.

By the effect it has, among other things. Courts take into account whether the stated motive is believable.
Post reply on HN