This is going to get very interesting, I could see some erroneously claiming something as AI and demanding that I have an AI label when it's not. I'm not sure how this is even enforceable.
EU will mandate labels on authentic-looking AI content starting August 2
81–90 of 114 posts
Re: EU will mandate labels on authentic-looking AI content starting August 2
#82"It is a matter not only of customer protection, it’s also a matter of democracy protection." Ensuring democracy by selectively censoring. I feel safer already. I better put AI label on every video I make as there is already AI in the supply chain of all the tech I use. All content contains AI now. Let's talk about AI commissars who will decide which company will survive. In fact, let's create a few an NGOs to help!…
requiring deep fakes to be labeled as deep fakes has nothing to do with censorship
there is also nothing selectively about it, it applies to all deep fake equally
if you had read the article you would know that this is mainly about deep fakes and other deceptive content, not every use of an AI tool (e.g. line smoothing) requires an AI label, specifically it's only about content "generative AI" usage _in a context where it's potentially deceptive_.
> AI commissars who will decide which company will survive
a huge jump in logic not related to anything in this article
> I doubt EU will survive the next decade or two without major crisis or war tbh.
again unrelated, but any country which doesn't fights deep fake propaganda will most likely not survive as a democratic state of law, soo if anything this action increases the chance of survival
> Edit: Instead of downvoting, how about you try retorting?
- then maybe read the article properly, your comments put it highly in question you did
- also maybe don't have non logically sustained jumps in reasoning in your article, especially not when you jumps in reasoning come with tons of sarcasm
> I don't think I'm incorrect here. But maybe I am!
well yes, you have even missed the long known, explicitly pointed out sever threat deep fake propaganda is for any state and especially democracies. That is not a good bases for any argument.
Also passive aggressive edits are a good way to get even more down votes if anything.
Re: EU will mandate labels on authentic-looking AI content starting August 2
#83Meta-commentary on this discussion: okay, I know the ‘hacker news’ thing has always been kinda a misnomer, and has gotten moreso. But it’s still kind of shocking to me how little people here value making something, versus pretending to make something. There’s value to actually doing stuff.
The amount of “all artists will use AI to pretend to make stuff, because money” is honestly kinda bizarre, and completely misunderstands the motivations of most artists, writers and makers.
Re: EU will mandate labels on authentic-looking AI content starting August 2
#84My biggest problem with this is that this regulation is only aimed at AI. It should be much broader and include any technology that can be used to make 'authentic-looking' content. Why should someone who's good at Photoshop or VFX be allowed to share fake stuff as real, but not someone who's good with AI? For many years we've been aware that edited models on magazine covers, Instagram and in ads are negatively impact…
You completely disregard practical implications. Can you manually create images that were done via AI? Of course you can. Can you create AI fake content and misinformation as easily with human labor as you can with AI? No. Understanding this distinction answers whether you see the implications AI has on the future of democracies or not.
What about the practical difficulty of defining "AI"? You could explicitly call out, say, diffusion models, but that would leave future holes for new AI technologies
What about Photoshop being driven by Claude Cowork? That my seem asinine, but it is a serious consideration
I found this definition here [1]
> ‘AI system’ means a machine-based system that is designed to operate with varying levels of autonomy and that may exhibit adaptiveness after deployment, and that, for explicit or implicit objectives, infers, from the input it receives, how to generate outputs such as predictions, content, recommendations, or decisions that can influence physical or virtual environments;
But that barely clears anything up. Even worse, I would not include a simple user-prompted image generator under this definition, as it is not operating with any autonomy. Or, you interpret it so broadly that seam carving [2] is considered AI, let alone content-aware fill
Re: EU will mandate labels on authentic-looking AI content starting August 2
#85Meta-commentary on this discussion: okay, I know the ‘hacker news’ thing has always been kinda a misnomer, and has gotten moreso. But it’s still kind of shocking to me how little people here value making something, versus pretending to make something. There’s value to actually doing stuff. The amount of “all artists will use AI to pretend to make stuff, because money” is honestly kinda bizarre, and completely misunde…
The problem isn't the "real" artists, it's everyone else.
Re: EU will mandate labels on authentic-looking AI content starting August 2
#86"It is a matter not only of customer protection, it’s also a matter of democracy protection." Ensuring democracy by selectively censoring. I feel safer already. I better put AI label on every video I make as there is already AI in the supply chain of all the tech I use. All content contains AI now. Let's talk about AI commissars who will decide which company will survive. In fact, let's create a few an NGOs to help!…
Labelling stuff as “this was made by a magic robot” is not censorship. Don’t be silly.
I'm OK with it if no action is taken when content is not labeled and public officials work for free.
Label doesn't prove anything. It just provides a false sense of certainty.
Re: EU will mandate labels on authentic-looking AI content starting August 2
#87How 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
That text defines AI as such
> ‘AI system’ means a machine-based system that is designed to operate with varying levels of autonomy and that may exhibit adaptiveness after deployment, and that, for explicit or implicit objectives, infers, from the input it receives, how to generate outputs such as predictions, content, recommendations, or decisions that can influence physical or virtual environments
To me, this definition reads as only including "agentic" uses, or automated decision engines. An image generator does not operate with any autonomy. If you interpret the "input" part loosely enough to include it, then you'd likely include old and simple techniques like seam carving [1], which very few would consider "AI" in the contemporary sense
Re: EU will mandate labels on authentic-looking AI content starting August 2
#88"It is a matter not only of customer protection, it’s also a matter of democracy protection." Ensuring democracy by selectively censoring. I feel safer already. I better put AI label on every video I make as there is already AI in the supply chain of all the tech I use. All content contains AI now. Let's talk about AI commissars who will decide which company will survive. In fact, let's create a few an NGOs to help!…
requiring deep fakes to be labeled as deep fakes has nothing to do with censorship there is also nothing selectively about it, it applies to all deep fake equally if you had read the article you would know that this is mainly about deep fakes and other deceptive content, not every use of an AI tool (e.g. line smoothing) requires an AI label, specifically it's only about content "generative AI" usage _in a context whe…
Pros: none
Content label doesn't transform the content. It just provides a false sense of category.
I still have to think critically whether there is a label or not.
Cons: New ways for sociopaths for corruption, embezzlement and censorship.
That is my point.
This idea that legislation has no downsides is extremely naive and borderline retarded. Look at proposed legislation from the point of someone who wants to destroy everything. Does it provide a path to that goal? Is the risk worth it?
Every government grows over time and produces more and more suffering while consuming more and more wealth. I recommend reading The Gulag Archipelago. Your thinking seems to be dangerously naive to you and people around you.
Re: EU will mandate labels on authentic-looking AI content starting August 2
#89Meta-commentary on this discussion: okay, I know the ‘hacker news’ thing has always been kinda a misnomer, and has gotten moreso. But it’s still kind of shocking to me how little people here value making something, versus pretending to make something. There’s value to actually doing stuff. The amount of “all artists will use AI to pretend to make stuff, because money” is honestly kinda bizarre, and completely misunde…
> There’s value to actually doing stuff.
Maybe sometimes. But rarely. Usually value is in the actual stuff.
Re: EU will mandate labels on authentic-looking AI content starting August 2
#90Makes 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 consumer verify
.. and ..
> and let them decide
Isn't it naive thinking ?