Enforcing that ban is going to be difficult.
Just the threat of being able to summarily remove AI content and hand out account discipline will cut down drastically on AI and practically eliminate the really low effort ‘slop’, it’s not perfect but it’s damn useful.
It’s also going to make it really easy to take down the content you don’t like, just accuse it of being AI and watch the witch hunting roll in. I’ve seen plenty of examples of traditional artists getting accused of using AI in other forums, I don’t imagine this will be any different.
I got accused of being an AI for writing a comment reply to someone which was merely informative, empathic and polite!
People already mass report to abuse existing AI moderation tools. It’s already starting to be accounted for and I can’t imagine it so much as slowing down implementing an anti AI rule if I’m being honest.
The ban doesn’t need a 100% perfect AI screening protocol to be a success.
Just the fact that AI is banned might appeal to a wide demographic. If the ban is actually enforced, even in just 25% of the most blatant cases, it might be just the push a new platform needs to take off.
Just because something might be hard means we should give up before even trying?
Of course not, but I don’t think anybody suggested that.
Only if we let it be. There’s no technical reason why the origin of a video couldn’t have a signature generated by the capture device, or legally requiring AI models to do the same for any content they generate. Anything without an origin sticker is assumed to be garbage by default. Obviously there would need to be some way to make captures either anonymous or not at the user’s choice, and nation states can evade these things with sufficient effort like they always do, but we could cut a lot of slop out by doing some simple stuff like that.
“Legally” doesn’t mean shit if it’s not enforceable. Besides, removing watermarks is trivial.
There is no technically rigorous way to filter AI content, unfortunately.
while a phone signing a video to show that it was captured with the camera is possible, it will be easy too to fake the signature. all it would take would be a hacked device to steal the private key. and even if apple/google/samsung have perfectly secure systems to sign the origin of the video, there would be ton of cheaper phones that would likely won’t.
So what’s the angle? The Internet is getting flooded by AI slop. AI needs fresh REAL content to train with. That’s the angle. You are there to provide frsh amd original content to feed the AI.
Thats a very good point and probably exactly the idea. Dorsey has always just been an actor that says one thing and thinks another.
Maybe the angle is just that people hate Ai? Seriously, especially young people…
Is you a youngin? Cause no product under the control of a billionaire is free. If it’s free, you are the product. AI is hated and they’re trying to make a product using that hate as a basis for target audience
Nothing is free, If they can sell ads to people because they don’t like AI, they will. They’re rebooting it with about the same intent as it was originally designed to have.
Again with this idea of the ever-worsening ai models. It just isn’t happening in reality.
The same reality where GPT5’s launch a couple months back was a massive failure with users and showed a lot of regression to less reliable output than GPT4? Or perhaps the reality where most corporations that have used AI found no benefit and have given up reported this year?
LLMs are good tools for some uses, but those uses are quite limited and niche. They are however a square peg being crammed into the round hole of ‘AGI’ by Altman etc while they put their hands out for another $10bil - or, more accurately while they make a trade swap deal with MS or Nvidia or any of the other AI orobouros trade partners that hype up the bubble for self-benefit.
Not only it is actually happening, it’s actually well researched and mathematically proven.
You may want to use AI’s some time for the sake of science. They are many times worse than a year ago.
It would be great if ALL social media platforms banned that garbage.
Or just had a filter to hide it. I don’t feel like banning something from everyone just because I personally don’t like it.
I would and I’d have no problem with it at all. If people want AI slop, they can go find it where it is allowed.
There’s literally an app for it called Sora.
I think such a filter wouldn’t function well enough to keep up, such is the case with search engines which offer the feature, and instead a 0 tolerance ban would be the only effective method.
Zero tolerance ban still requires a method of detecting AI content in order to enforce said ban. Having such detection system in place would then just as well give people the option to choose for themselves whether they want to see such content or not. Ofcourse such filter isn’t 100% accurate but neither is a total ban. Some of that content will always get through.
Humans can make reports to contribute to banning accounts and even IPs that prove problematic.
Humans contributing tags for filters would be like fighting the tide with a spoon.
Humans contributing tags for filters would be like fighting the tide with a spoon.
Isn’t that what you’re literally advocating for here? I don’t see the practical difference between having users reporting AI content versus users reporting AI content that isn’t correctly labeled as such.
I stand behind what I said. Give people the option to filter it out of their own feeds if they want to. I don’t wish to push my own content preferences onto people with different tastes. Curating your own feed is the way to go. Not top down control from the tech companies themselves.
You don’t see a practical difference between tagging an image and removing the source of the images? Really? You can’t figure it out when its been spelled out for you? You, specifically you, have a hard time understanding? You’re not piecing the mystery together, yet? Your wheels are turning on this colossal conundrum?
Hey bud, mull it over for a bit and let me know if you figure it out. Smh.
Nor can I figure out this level of unprovoked hostility toward a complete stranger, but looking through your moderation history made it pretty clear that it’s not personal but you’re just lashing out to cope with whatever personal issues you’re dealing with. I don’t like it but get it. I genuinely hope you find some peace, but I don’t want anything more to do with this, so don’t spend your time writing a response. I’ve had enough with trying to deal with mean people online.
Hmmmm, must not be American.
personally, I would ban it at the federal level and anytime you use it someone shows up at your house and destroys everything and throws away your computer. and then you go to jail. and then anyone who tries to visit you in jail gets punched in the face. and you have to eat poop in jail
Prohibition of something easy to
makerun at home? An interesting choice.yea
Loops ftw
What’s Loops?
Vine, but federated!
More tiktok than vine, really
You’re not wrong, but an arbitrary maximum video length is the least of my problems with a Dorsey product
TikTok but without users.
TIL. Thanks friend.
Why would anyone touch any garbage this guy produces?!
Banned for now…
deleted by creator
Another walled garden that will fracture the system even more and give even more credit to the open social web.
It is on nostr, I don’t like the protocol very much but it is decentralised
Except it’s not a walled garden, it’s built on nostr.
Lemmy hates everything and everyone it seems.
Jack Dorsey more than deserves the hate and I’m happy to discuss it with you.
We like our negativity here - it’s still okay to disagree and be positive though!
That being said, Dorsey was fine selling his last media company to the highest-bidding fascist. Chances are he‘ll do it again.
Personally, I won’t use any social media that isn’t billionaire-proof.
Valid criticism isn’t baseless hate. And, is better to be skeptical than blindly complacent.
Honestly, I don’t really trust any cryptobro, I see them on similar level as AI-bros
https://divine.video/ - For people who want to see for themselves.
Also the android app from the TechCrunch article, seems like it was nuked though: https://divine.b-cdn.net/app-release.apk
In the main picture, about half of those videos use filters that do something based on the location of the person’s head. Unless they’ve changed the definition since I went to college, that would be classified as a type of computer vision, aka AI.
Yeah they just mean the more layperson understanding of AI as in AI-generated content or as YouTube Studio dubs it: “synthetic media” (pretty good term imo)
Basically just stuff that was “generated”.
I’m sure transformative use of ML like filters etc. would be fine. Even incorporation of generated elements in otherwise a normal video would be fine.
So “I know it when I see it” rules, rather than anything rigorously defined.
Assuming this gets any traction at all the witch hunts will be rampant.
Well, my kind of humor.
To get the perfect selfie please pull your tongue back in your mouth. Good, now close you mouth. Perfect, now lower your phone thirty degree. Great, now lower it thirty degrees more. Almost there! Now lower thirty more degrees and put it the fuck away in your pocket.
Congratulations, you now have the perfect selfie.
Love this
Loops: “Am I a joke to you?”
Everyone else: “Who said that?”
Wasn’t he all in on AI just a couple months ago? Praising how awesome vibe coding is? Fuck that guy. Just another billionaire peddling lies for profit. You’ll just be creating content to train his AI.
As someone else said, don’t be surprised if this is a ruse to hoover up training data that isn’t AI generated. Guy is a tosser.
Sure pal, sure. That’s what all said, no AI, and look now.
Can’t wait whe they will offer him 1bilion or scare him to death to put AI on it.
