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

YouTube made AI enhancements to videos without warning or permission

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 292 posts

Re: YouTube made AI enhancements to videos without warning or permission

#221

Post by therobots927 »

cgriswald wrote: post #206
pessimizer wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why, pray tell, would a similar series of events be relevant to a completely different series of events except as analogy? Let me use an extremely close analogy to illustrate: Imagine someone shot a basketball, and it didn't go into the hoop. Why would telling a story about somebody else who once shot a basketball which failed to go into the hoop be helpful or relevant?

Your extremely close analogy gets to the crux of why people are disagreeing here: It doesn’t have to be analogy. You can be pointing out an equivalence.

Regardless this was my whole point. The original point was a fallacy: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_equivalence

Re: YouTube made AI enhancements to videos without warning or permission

#223

Post by moritzwarhier »

JdeBP wrote: post #207
dsign wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The well is already poisoned. I'm refraining from hiring editors merely because I suspect there's a high chance they'll just use an LLM. All recent books I'm reading is with suspicion that they have been written by AI. However, polished to a point that we humans start to lose our unique tone is what style guides that go into the minutiae of comma placement try do do. And I'm currently reading a book I'm 100% sure has…

There's a YouTuber named Fil Henley ( https://www.youtube.com/@WingsOfPegasus ) who has been covering this for some years, now. Xe regularly comments on how universal application of pitch correction in post as an "industry standard" has dragged the great singers of yore down to the same level of mediocrity as everyone else. Xe also occasionally reminds people that, equal temperament being what it is, this pitch corre…

Extremely good analogy and context with the pitch correction thing and equal temperament IMO.

We can only be stoic and say "slop is gonna be slop". People are getting used to AI slop in text ("just proofreading", "not a natural speaker") and they got used to artificial artifacts in commercial/popular music.

It's sad, but it is what it is. As with DSP, there's always a creative way to use the tools (weird prompts, creative uses of failure modes).

In DSP and music production, auto-tune plus vocal comping plus overdubs have normalized music regressing towards an artificial ideal. But inevitably, real samples and individualistic artists achieve distinction by not using the McDonald's-kind of optimization.

Then, at some point, some of this lands in mainstream music, some of it doesn't.

There were always people hearing the difference.

It's a matter of taste.

Re: YouTube made AI enhancements to videos without warning or permission

#224

Post by akudha »

dsign wrote: post #99
hliyan wrote: post #83

A chill ran down my spine as I imagined this being applied to the written word online: my articles being automatically "corrected" or "improved" the moment I hit publish, any book manuscripts being sent to editors being similarly "polished" to a point that we humans start to lose our unique tone and everything we read falls into that strange uncanny valley where everything reads ok, you can't quite put your finger on…

The well is already poisoned. I'm refraining from hiring editors merely because I suspect there's a high chance they'll just use an LLM. All recent books I'm reading is with suspicion that they have been written by AI. However, polished to a point that we humans start to lose our unique tone is what style guides that go into the minutiae of comma placement try do do. And I'm currently reading a book I'm 100% sure has…

I was listening to an interview (having a hard time remembering the name now). The guest was asked how he decides what to read, he replied that one easy way for him to filter is he only considers books published before the 70s. At the time, it sounded strange to me. It doesn't anymore, maybe he has a point

Re: YouTube made AI enhancements to videos without warning or permission

#225

Post by cgriswald »

therobots927 wrote: post #221
cgriswald wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your extremely close analogy gets to the crux of why people are disagreeing here: It doesn’t have to be analogy. You can be pointing out an equivalence.

Regardless this was my whole point. The original point was a fallacy: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_equivalence

I'd be interested in your reason for thinking so but I think you can see your supporting argument is not compelling:

> And comparing digging through the ground to human thought and creativity is an odd mix of self debasement and arrogance.

> I'm guessing there is an unspoken financial incentive guiding your point of view.

Re: YouTube made AI enhancements to videos without warning or permission

#226

Post by alex1138 »

artninja1988 wrote: post #18
alex1138 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can I just start a petition to remove Shorts entirely?

Just don't watch them?

This is a very common response where users acquiesce to an internet of mediocrity rather than demanding the corporations do better

I mostly don't watch them. But they literally spam every single search. (While we're at it, Youtube also isn't very good at honoring keywords in searches either)

Re: YouTube made AI enhancements to videos without warning or permission

#227

Post by discardedrefuse »

crazygringo wrote: post #196
discardedrefuse wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you watch the youtube video[1] linked in the article you get a much better examples, that clearly look like AI slop. Tho I do understand that people's ability to discern AI slop varies wildly. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=86nhP8tvbLY

> that clearly look like AI slop That's not what AI slop means. There's no GenAI. I watched the video. It's literally just some mild sharpening in the side-by-side comparison.

Whatever youtube is doing adds a painted over effect that makes the video look like AI slop. They took a perfectly normal looking video, and made it look fake. As a viewer, if you can't tell or don't care... That's fine. For you. But at the very least, the creator should have a say.

Re: YouTube made AI enhancements to videos without warning or permission

#228

Post by haswell »

croes wrote: post #180
haswell wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> thoughtfully polished > enhancing it with care I get what you’re going for with this comment, but it seamlessly anthropomorphizes what’s happening in a way that has the opposite impact I think. There is no thoughtfulness or care involved. Only algorithmic conformance to some non-human synthesis of the given style. The issue is not just about the words that come out the other end. The issue is the loss of the transm…

You do realize I just took parents comment and gave an AI the prompt to rewrite it by changing everything negative to a positive?

Yes, that was pretty obvious, and that's part of why I wrote what I did.

Re: YouTube made AI enhancements to videos without warning or permission

#229

Post by tempodox »

carlosjobim wrote: post #97
hliyan wrote: post #83

A chill ran down my spine as I imagined this being applied to the written word online: my articles being automatically "corrected" or "improved" the moment I hit publish, any book manuscripts being sent to editors being similarly "polished" to a point that we humans start to lose our unique tone and everything we read falls into that strange uncanny valley where everything reads ok, you can't quite put your finger on…

The only way to know for sure that something was written by a human: It contains racism, or any other opinion AIs are forbidden to express. Now imagine the near future of the Internet, when all people have to adapt to that in order to not be dismissed as AI.

How naive. Grok generates racism as a service, and Elon does his best to tune it that way.

Re: YouTube made AI enhancements to videos without warning or permission

#230

Post by lolc »

roenxi wrote: post #63
lolc wrote: post #8

> "You know, YouTube is constantly working on new tools and experimenting with stuff," Beato says. "They're a best-in-class company, I've got nothing but good things to say. YouTube changed my life." My despondent brain auto-translated that to: "My livelihood depends on Youtube"

I push back on the idea there is anything despondent there. If YouTube was enabling my lifestyle I'd be pretty happy about the situation and certainly not about to start piling public pressure on them. These companies get enough hate from roving bands of angry internet denizens. Touching up videos is bad but it is hardly material to break out the pitchforks compared to some of the political manoeuvres YouTube has bee…

Oh I have no idea about the brain state of Beato. Just my brain read it that way automatically.
Post reply on HN