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

51–60 of 113 posts

Re: AI Generated Propaganda

#51

Post by bigfishrunning »

sn41 wrote: post #45
throwuwu wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FUD, there’s just as much uplifting and positive stuff coming out of MJ and other AI tools. You’re just focusing on the negative.

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...

Re: AI Generated Propaganda

#52

Post by awegio »

ufo wrote: post #8
petesergeant wrote: post #5

The source[0] marks the image as such: "Иллюстрация на обложке: изображение сгенерировано искусственным интеллектом", which I think is probably the best "tell" 0: https://uproar-crowned-964778.appspot.com/2023/04/24/my-dlya... via https://twitter.com/ChrisO_wiki/status/1653118082766852097?s...

Which translates to "Illustration on the cover: the image is generated by artificial intelligence"

So like almost every news website they added a title picture to every article to drive engagement. The problem here is that they used a picture where a face was visible, they have to use some generic image instead.

The whole trend of adding stock pictures to everything only creates distractions. It's bad for the reader, good for the publisher. The pictures are either useless or misleading.

Re: AI Generated Propaganda

#53

Post by SushiHippie »

sebastiennight wrote: post #43
skeltoac wrote: post #24

Off topic. Scrolled a little bit past the thread and almost got caught up in Twitter’s hate bait algorithm. Sexual imagery and I didn’t ask for. This is why I need to remember never to follow links to Twitter, no matter what, ever. One of the hazards of browsing HN: old darlings like Twitter will be tolerated even after they become NSFW by default.

There is an open-source browser extension called Privacy Redirect which will turn all Twitter links you click into Nitter links [0]. This also turns Reddit links into Libreddit/Teddit links, YouTube links into Invidious links, etc. Basically you get to browse an Internet without intrusive pre-roll ads or outrage algorithms. I think based on your comment that this might be of interest to you. [0]: https://github.com/S…

I'd recommend to have a look at https://github.com/libredirect/ as it gets actively developed and has more sites and features.

Re: AI Generated Propaganda

#54

Post by mabbo »

carlosjobim wrote: post #40
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.

> To those saying "Oh I can tell it's fake, obviously!", consider: will your parents/grandparents? No, they won't. There's not a chance. Yesterday we were visiting an elderly relative, who received a video in WhatsApp family group chat with an AI generated child saying a prayer. I had to repeatedly tell them it was not a real child on the video. To me it was obvious since the whole body was static and only the face w…

My sister tried to get my mother to play an April fools prank on me this year. She wanted her to send me an email saying "I got your voicemail and I sent the money! I hope that's enough but it was all I had available!"

My mother thought it was a bad idea and didn't want to get involved.

It would have been incredible and I would absolutely have fallen for it.

Re: AI Generated Propaganda

#55

Post by sdfghswe »

detrites wrote: post #19
sdfghswe wrote: post #10

It's obviously AI generated, to the point that it's likely propaganda to suggest that your enemy does propaganda.

So then why wouldn't they do a better job, to avoid detection as "propaganda to suggest that your enemies do propaganda"? Seems likely it's propaganda to suggest that your enemies do "propaganda to suggest that your enemies do propaganda"...

Because they literally put on the cover "this was generated using AI".

The people using the image aren't doing propaganda, they're just cutting costs.

The people claiming that using the image is doing propaganda, are doing propaganda.

Re: AI Generated Propaganda

#56

Post by Der_Einzige »

sn41 wrote: post #45
throwuwu wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FUD, there’s just as much uplifting and positive stuff coming out of MJ and other AI tools. You’re just focusing on the negative.

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"

Re: AI Generated Propaganda

#57

Post by hammyhavoc »

throwuwu wrote: post #31
morkalork wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What was life like 150-200 years ago? Back then you had only the written word to go by for news of the outside world and it was just as easily manipulated. I think we've been living through a brief and unique period of truth-y-ness with a plethora of photographic and video evidence.

Agreed, we’ve been hoodwinked by photos and video and this is the wake up call we need for everyone to realize that seeing an image of something is in no way comparable to actually being there. We’re about to enter a much more skeptical world and that’s a good thing.

After seeing the QAnon folks, I think you'll just see in-fighting about what the "truth" is, when in reality, both sides are full of shite but for different reasons.

Re: AI Generated Propaganda

#58

Post by theptip »

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.

Agreed. Scrolling past pre-coffee I didn’t look too closely at the the details, and only on second glance did I spot the (in hindsight) obvious flaws.

This is like how I could smuggle two “the”s into the previous paragraph without most people noticing; we skim more often than we realize.

Re: AI Generated Propaganda

#59

Post by hammyhavoc »

jmondi wrote: post #44
throwuwu wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed, we’ve been hoodwinked by photos and video and this is the wake up call we need for everyone to realize that seeing an image of something is in no way comparable to actually being there. We’re about to enter a much more skeptical world and that’s a good thing.

A healthy amount of skepticism is good. You can easily take your skepticism too far and turn into a tinfoil hat wearing conspiracy theorist who doesnt believe anything and has a completely cynical view on the world. I know a few of these...

What about the tinfoil hatters that believe everything just because it's on some 2h YT video?

Re: AI Generated Propaganda

#60

Post by dragonwriter »

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.

> To those saying "Oh I can tell it's fake, obviously!", consider: will your parents/grandparents?

Well, my parents and grandparents are dead, so probably not.

But, when they were alive, they had enough experience of the real world that they would be suspicious of bandages worn outside of clothes, the printed document wrapped around the arm, and the gauze that rather than wrapping fully around the head seamless merges into the forehead.

But, more importantly, it would be trivial to do what all the really successful fake images of this war and most precious ones have done: just take a real picture, from a real conflict (sometimes, even the same one) and lie about the context. Lying with pictures is not a novel threat.

Post reply on HN