• conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    I think this is a good thing.

    Pictures/video without verified provenance have not constituted legitimate evidence for anything with meaningful stakes for several years. Perfect fakes have been possible at the level of serious actors already.

    Putting it in the hands of everyone brings awareness that pictures aren’t evidence, lowering their impact over time. Not being possible for anyone would be great, but that isn’t and hasn’t been reality for a while.

    • reksas@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      While this is good thing, not being able to tell what is real and what is not would be disaster. What if every comment here but you were generated by some really advanced ai? What they can do now will be laughable compared to what they can do many years from now. And at that point it will be too late to demand anything to be done about it.

      Ai generated content should have somekind of tag or mark that is inherently tied to it that can be used to identify it as ai generated, even if only part is used. No idea how that would work though if its even possible.

  • stoy@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    TL;DR: The new Reimage feature on the Google Pixel 9 phones is really good at AI manipulation, while being very easy to use. This is bad.

        • kernelle@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          Photoshop has existed for a bit now. So incredibly shocking it was only going to get better and easier to do, move along with the times oldtimer.

          • ggppjj@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            Photoshop requires time and talent to make a believable image.

            This requires neither.

              • ggppjj@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                3 months ago

                You said “but” like it invalidated what I said, instead of being a true statement and a non sequitur.

                You aren’t wrong, and I don’t think that changes what I said either.

          • sorghum@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            Well yeah, I’m not concerned with its ease of use nowadays. I’m more concerned with the computer forensics experts not being able to detect a fake for which Photoshop has always been detectable.