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

91–100 of 114 posts

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

#91

Post by kubelsmieci »

DarkNova6 wrote: post #56
brindleth wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rogue nations will not apply this AI label to the content they generate, so they will end up looking more authentic in comparison.

More authentic because of what, a missing watermark? It still has 2 positive outcomes: 1: It gives legal leverage against vectors of misinformation. Misinformation is tricky to combat legally and this is a first obvious measure that can be taken. 2: Reputation will become more important in the future, and if you are found to have repeatedly posted AI content claiming it is not it will damage you. Not to mention that…

> Reputation will become more important in the future,

Citation needed

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

#92

Post by mosura »

kubelsmieci wrote: post #90
mosura wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

> Let the consumer verify .. and .. > and let them decide Isn't it naive thinking ?

Not remotely. Let people check authenticity of the source and make their own private decisions.

The entire problem is fraud, and governments are hardly immune from that.

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

#93

Post by rsynnott »

DarkNova6 wrote: post #57
rsynnott wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Writing docs is, at best, only marginally creative work. Though honestly, still probably skip the LLM if you’ve any pride in your work; LLM-‘assisted’ docs are generally worse than those written by people.

So what are journalistic texts if not docs? At this point, an LLM is just another evolution from the typewriter. You are still responsible for your work. What is important are the semantics and statements of the text. Less so how the exact arrangement of letters came to be.

Journalists should not be using LLMs. Most proper papers ban them from using LLMs to write their stuff, for instance see https://www.rte.ie/news/2026/0319/1564281-mediahuis-peter-va...

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

#94

Post by DarkNova6 »

kubelsmieci wrote: post #91
DarkNova6 wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

More authentic because of what, a missing watermark? It still has 2 positive outcomes: 1: It gives legal leverage against vectors of misinformation. Misinformation is tricky to combat legally and this is a first obvious measure that can be taken. 2: Reputation will become more important in the future, and if you are found to have repeatedly posted AI content claiming it is not it will damage you. Not to mention that…

> Reputation will become more important in the future, Citation needed

[dead]

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

#95

Post by DarkNova6 »

mcv wrote: post #76
DarkNova6 wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I'd argue that if a satire or parody is strong enough having a small watermark will not detract from its statement.

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

#96

Post by DarkNova6 »

rsynnott wrote: post #93
DarkNova6 wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So what are journalistic texts if not docs? At this point, an LLM is just another evolution from the typewriter. You are still responsible for your work. What is important are the semantics and statements of the text. Less so how the exact arrangement of letters came to be.

Journalists should not be using LLMs. Most proper papers ban them from using LLMs to write their stuff, for instance see https://www.rte.ie/news/2026/0319/1564281-mediahuis-peter-va...

You are not wrong, but here's the catch:

"Even I - with all my years of experience and knowledge - fell into the trap of hallucinations. I summarised reports using AI tools and worked from those summaries, trusting they were accurate.

He used an LLM to perform research instead of using it as a mere writing tool. I think large language models are great at formatting text, formatting, structuring and giving a stylecheck. But the last pass and review must always be a human. Everything posted by an LLM under your name is still under your name and you are liable for every single word. It's about the outcome and everybody who uses it is responsible for it.

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

#97

Post by seanmcdirmid »

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 it looks like slop, it’s obviously AI. If it looks like someone actually put some effort into it, or if it looks like “real”, then it needs to be labeled because you wouldn’t know it was AI otherwise?

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

#98

Post by seanmcdirmid »

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?

It could turn out like the California “chemicals present that could cause cancer” that are ubiquitous in California, and therefore not useful as signal.

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

#99

Post by seanmcdirmid »

Sol- wrote: post #17

EU once again at the frontier of AI.. regulation. Hard to assess what this rule will actually accomplish. Ultimately AI will be involved in all creative processes going forward, so all pieces of media will have at least some basic AI disclaimer. At the same time, the bad actors that the EU is so paranoid about (Russians secretly undermining our democracy and other boogeymen) will obviously not use the label. But it's…

I’m pretty sure the big techs get safe harbor in this, otherwise they would have to stop serving up third party content in the EU all together.

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

#100

Post by danaris »

mosura wrote: post #65
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...

"Let the customer verify if the flour has asbestos in it, and decide if they trust it."

"Let the customer verify if the car airbags were installed properly, and decide if they trust it.

"Let the customer verify if the plant that produced the plastic in their grocery bags is dumping its waste products in the water nearby, and decide if they trust it."

No.

We have governments and regulations for a reason. It is utterly unreasonable to expect customers to verify everything themselves. We need clear, firm labeling laws for all kinds of products. There's no reason this should be different.

Post reply on HN