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

AI Generated Propaganda

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 113 posts

Re: AI Generated Propaganda

#101

Post by sangnoir »

mabbo wrote: post #17

To those saying "Oh I can tell it's fake, obviously!", consider: will your parents/grandparents? And will you still be able to tell in five years, when this tech has had 20 new iterations, each addressing the very tells that right now let you notice it's fake? I know, I know, photoshop and fake pictures have always been around. But now, everyone can do it in 30 seconds. That changes things.

> But now, everyone can do it in 30 seconds. That changes things.

Does it? I've seen limited amounts of text-based propaganda / misinformation and anyone can do it 30 seconds, yet somehow we're not drowning in a flood of it. Society got better at verifying textual information, even though some individuals remain susceptible. In my chat groups, it is always the same 2 people that fall for - and propagate - scams/snake-oil/misinformation regardless of the medium.

Re: AI Generated Propaganda

#102

Post by Imnimo »

r721 wrote: post #99
Imnimo wrote: post #88

Is the accompanying story untrue, or is this just a case of someone using an AI tool to create a generic stock image for an otherwise-truthful article, and then the provenance of the image being lost?

I didn't read the story but the outlet is quite well known ("Lyudi Baikala"/"People of Baikal"), they mentioned the illustration is AI-generated in the end of the article. As I see it the confusion started from Twitter user ChrisO_wiki which retells independent Russian media stories in the form of Twitter threads, and he used the image without mentioning that it was AI-generated.

Hmm, if that's all this is, I'm not sure I would count this as "AI Generated Propaganda". It's not really someone using AI tools to try to fool people, it's just a case of poor communication.

Re: AI Generated Propaganda

#103

Post by tptacek »

bigfishrunning wrote: post #51
sn41 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Were you around when Internet 2.0 was supposed to bring democracy all over the world? It has brought a slew of right wing populists. We need to stop viewing technology as neutral, and "oh it will all turn out nice, like the railways did". These are tools which manipulate the human psyche, and not the same as stagecoaches to be disposed of.

"Populism refers to a range of political stances that emphasize the idea of "the people" and often juxtapose this group against "the elite". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Populism I can't think of anything more democratic then appealing to the majority of the people...

Populism is implicitly an argument that, on some issue or portfolio of issues, there is a coherent will of the decisive majority of all people, such that the opposing view on the issue(s) is democratically illegitimate (because it's an elite interest, or a concentrated interest in a collective action problem). Populism is thus an implicit rejection of pluralism, the idea that groups of people are complicated and contain multiple overlapping and often incoherent sets of issue preferences, and that the goal of politics is to accommodate that.

Populism can be tactically useful in a democracy, especially if the ground truth on some issue is that its politics really have been captured by elite interests, and that all of the variance in opinion on that issue comes down to "elite vs. popular". But those issues are pretty rare, and as a formula for the broader project of governing, populism is a disaster.

Re: AI Generated Propaganda

#104

Post by iotku »

jbattle wrote: post #85

I have little fear about AI generating propaganda. It's cheap to write a crappy article and fake a photo or two - or choose a real photo but twist the story around the photo. What I worry about is "artificial / generated consent". You read some upsetting story, and your skeptical brain holds it at arms length. Then you read commentary in a forum you trust and you see message after message of thoughtfully worded suppo…

>I like to believe I'm an independent thinker, but a big part of my process is to seek out many different points of view and judging which feel well supported and well reasoned.

Ultimately that's the best most people can do short of intensive 'independent' research on most topics which outside of your personal expertise generally isn't entirely possible (even if you have good research skills, there's time limitations.)

>Consensus DOES play a role in my judgement forming. If consensus is easily faked, yikes.

Even prior to widespread AI tools this has been a strong method in information warfare, that's why it's detrimental to not show dislikes/downvotes in rating systems, it can make a far greater consensus appear to exist where there is far more disagreement among a topic.

As far as I'm concerned, the removal of those metrics are to enforce that specific purpose.

Re: AI Generated Propaganda

#105

Post by LawTalkingGuy »

Der_Einzige wrote: post #56
sn41 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Were you around when Internet 2.0 was supposed to bring democracy all over the world? It has brought a slew of right wing populists. We need to stop viewing technology as neutral, and "oh it will all turn out nice, like the railways did". These are tools which manipulate the human psyche, and not the same as stagecoaches to be disposed of.

Railways were the reason the Holocaust could happen Not exactly "turning out nice"

The railroads did not enable the Nazi genocides, they merely shaped them.

Rwanda killed a higher percentage of people, more quickly, without any advanced infrastructure. Without railroads the Nazis would have put the camps closer to the population centers or killed people where they lived. During that period the same technology and eventually even the same rails enabled the Allies to break the Nazis and free the remaining prisoners.

Verdict: Neutral.

Re: AI Generated Propaganda

#106

Post by orbital-decay »

r721 wrote: post #99
Imnimo wrote: post #88

Is the accompanying story untrue, or is this just a case of someone using an AI tool to create a generic stock image for an otherwise-truthful article, and then the provenance of the image being lost?

I didn't read the story but the outlet is quite well known ("Lyudi Baikala"/"People of Baikal"), they mentioned the illustration is AI-generated in the end of the article. As I see it the confusion started from Twitter user ChrisO_wiki which retells independent Russian media stories in the form of Twitter threads, and he used the image without mentioning that it was AI-generated.

> they mentioned the illustration is AI-generated in the end of the article

This is a really dark pattern, which is clearly being used for deception and plausible deniability (the article is reposted with the embedded picture - everyone sees the picture and assumes it's a photo without checking - it's not us, we warned you it's generated, with a tiny line decoupled from the picture nobody ever paid attention to).

Such use of generated images is extremely myopic and will backfire, or already backfired, sowing doubt in everything they and their side writes, regardless of their credibility. The case will be heavily abused by the opposite propaganda as well.

Re: AI Generated Propaganda

#107

Post by samstave »

LawTalkingGuy wrote: post #98
samstave wrote: post #74

We need ai regulation so quickly, and one thing that would be interesting for ai articles to be required to have a validation check marking it as AI, and ai platforms should be required to prove their content came from that ai Maybe a watermark?

That's like licensing all photocopiers to make sure the state knows who can produce propaganda. Not only is it an obvious rights violation, but it will never work. If watermarking is the solution it needs to be applied to the legitimate content.

Yeah, I am not qualified to develop the solution, but I am qualified enough to agree that this is going to be a difficult, slippery slope.

What I thought was going to be a massive cyber-war with russia/ukraine/nato/US/China, did not turn out so.

But once we have the first major cyber attack on [sinfrastructure] with an AI based crawling weapons, such as an AI developed STUXNET/DUQU - then we will have crossed the threshold into the next information era.

Re: AI Generated Propaganda

#108

Post by r721 »

orbital-decay wrote: post #106
r721 wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't read the story but the outlet is quite well known ("Lyudi Baikala"/"People of Baikal"), they mentioned the illustration is AI-generated in the end of the article. As I see it the confusion started from Twitter user ChrisO_wiki which retells independent Russian media stories in the form of Twitter threads, and he used the image without mentioning that it was AI-generated.

> they mentioned the illustration is AI-generated in the end of the article This is a really dark pattern, which is clearly being used for deception and plausible deniability (the article is reposted with the embedded picture - everyone sees the picture and assumes it's a photo without checking - it's not us, we warned you it's generated, with a tiny line decoupled from the picture nobody ever paid attention to). Suc…

>The case will be heavily abused by the opposite propaganda as well.

This is what already happened actually, the outlet is quite small, I just looked at their thread in Russian, and it received 7 likes:

https://twitter.com/BaikalPeople/status/1653348890807074818

People with agenda started to quote tweet ChrisO_wiki's English translation thread with captions like "look at this blatant pro-Ukrainian propaganda", and it got 1.5M views.

Re: AI Generated Propaganda

#109

Post by vintermann »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #83
vintermann wrote: post #70

I have a theory that propagandists' jobs are safer than they would seem. Thing is, when you're arguing online with some political consultant who four years ago was convinced Joe Biden was senile (because they supported Amy Klobuchar), who is now just as convinced he's sharp as a razor and ready for another term, are they really trying to convince you with their arguments ? No, I don't think so. I think the whole poin…

But who are they signaling to when they do this? Not the person they're arguing with. Not me, either, if I'm reading the conversation. To me, they're signaling "I refuse to actually consider anything the other person says. All I will do is argue and repeat my talking points. I might as well be a robot." They're signaling to the people who pay them, and to the people who might hire them in the future, not to their rea…

Well, I'm sure some of them are signalling to people who pay them, too. But I think it goes well beyond people who are paid. They're telling the world "This is what it means to be a [republican/democrat/etc.], and if you aren't like that yourself, you're with the enemy!". It's like an ultimatum to commit.

Re: AI Generated Propaganda

#110

Post by ImHereToVote »

daveguy wrote: post #75
ImHereToVote wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the things that an adult has to face growing up, is that at least some of the ideas that you hold in your head, have been cooked up in a think-tank or secret government bureau. EDIT: If you haven't realized this, then change some to a lot .

If only there was some big strong leader that could tell it to us straight.

Strong leader? Please elaborate.
Post reply on HN