4 ms·

Thanks for your comments! On 1) photo manipulation. If "dangerous" means that random, relatively harmless fake facts easily spread, I'm inclined to agree. I'm

Thanks for your comments! On 1) photo manipulation. If "dangerous" means that random, relatively harmless fake facts easily spread, I'm inclined to agree. I'm sure I've been tricked by a whole host of random facts which are probably actually BS based on random stuff I've read online. On the other hand, if "dangerous" means that a malicious agent can systematically manipulate the public via propaganda a la 20th century Stalin, I think this is basically impossible. Given widespread knowledge of photoshop, changing someone's mind about something significant with a doctored photo seems difficult (it is hard enough to change someone's mind with the truth!). Doctored photographs aren't completely harmless in that they can reinforce existing held beliefs (confirmation bias) and random fake facts aren't totally harmless either, I just think that the danger here is far below what has been implied in other places. In a nutshell, the effects are indeed wide spread, but perhaps not so insidious. On 2) there being no fire alarm, I'm actually very thankful to OpenAI for raising this discussion. While I disagree with their decision not to open source, this discussion was certainly worth having.

wallflower 8y ago
> On 1) photo manipulation. If "dangerous" means that random, relatively harmless fake facts easily spread, I'm inclined to agree. No, I think it is even more insidious what they were referring to. I think they meant that Photoshop has enabled and continues to enable unrealistic physical standards of beauty and BMI (mostly for women) that are transmitted in advertisements and news articles. In other words, Photoshop has enabled an alternative visual reality that is not realistic.
- hughzhang 8y ago
  But still much less dangerous than stuff like nuclear fallout or orwellian propaganda? This isn't to say that unrealistic beauty standards aren't a problem, just one that isn't worth trying to stop the march of technology for. Also, I think advertisements are more to blame here than photoshop. Do you think the ancient Greeks and Romans look like Michelangelo's David or any of their other statues? They weren't bombarded by ads though.
  - fossuser 8y ago
    Can't disinformation campaigns lead to instability and increase the risk of nuclear weapon use? I think the damage that disinformation can cause to democracy is real and we've already seen some of its effects without the ability to automate these things.
- Mirioron 8y ago
  Any kind of art that's good enough could also create an alternative visual reality.
intended 8y ago
> "dangerous" means that a malicious agent can systematically manipulate the public via propaganda a la 20th century Stalin You don't need total control to succeed. The same way that early VOIP calls didn't need perfect sound to be better than normal dial up. All you need is an economic, efficiency, quality or quantity advantage to create a new weapon/tool. India is facing a spate of lynchings over child kidnappings - driven by whatsapp forwards that combine videos from brutal mexican gang killings of children, pakistani safety warnings among others. I've seen them, they are being disseminated to people who have never had to harden themselves to the internet or behavior on the net. (There are many people who don't have knowledge of photoshop, and getting the knowledge to them is Hard. Even getting the knowledge to them can be used to weaken Facts instead of propaganda.) As a result villagers have lynched strangers, mental handicapped people, widows and anyone they suspect of kidnapping or potentially harming children. And I have NO idea, why or who is cutting up and making these videos to share on whatsapp. Evil manipulators, people who are doing it for laughs, well intentioned but misguided good samaritans? As a result of such forwards, whatsapp rolled out a limit on how many times a message can be forwarded - a feature they have pushed worldwide recently. We don't need perfection to do damage, we need efficiency. We already have other systems which can make up the difference in results.

wallflower 8y ago

> On 1) photo manipulation. If "dangerous" means that random, relatively harmless fake facts easily spread, I'm inclined to agree. No, I think it is even more insidious what they were referring to. I think they meant that Photoshop has enabled and continues to enable unrealistic physical standards of beauty and BMI (mostly for women) that are transmitted in advertisements and news articles. In other words, Photoshop has enabled an alternative visual reality that is not realistic.

hughzhang 8y ago
But still much less dangerous than stuff like nuclear fallout or orwellian propaganda? This isn't to say that unrealistic beauty standards aren't a problem, just one that isn't worth trying to stop the march of technology for. Also, I think advertisements are more to blame here than photoshop. Do you think the ancient Greeks and Romans look like Michelangelo's David or any of their other statues? They weren't bombarded by ads though.
- fossuser 8y ago
  Can't disinformation campaigns lead to instability and increase the risk of nuclear weapon use? I think the damage that disinformation can cause to democracy is real and we've already seen some of its effects without the ability to automate these things.
Mirioron 8y ago
Any kind of art that's good enough could also create an alternative visual reality.

intended 8y ago

> "dangerous" means that a malicious agent can systematically manipulate the public via propaganda a la 20th century Stalin You don't need total control to succeed. The same way that early VOIP calls didn't need perfect sound to be better than normal dial up. All you need is an economic, efficiency, quality or quantity advantage to create a new weapon/tool. India is facing a spate of lynchings over child kidnappings - driven by whatsapp forwards that combine videos from brutal mexican gang killings of children, pakistani safety warnings among others. I've seen them, they are being disseminated to people who have never had to harden themselves to the internet or behavior on the net. (There are many people who don't have knowledge of photoshop, and getting the knowledge to them is Hard. Even getting the knowledge to them can be used to weaken Facts instead of propaganda.) As a result villagers have lynched strangers, mental handicapped people, widows and anyone they suspect of kidnapping or potentially harming children. And I have NO idea, why or who is cutting up and making these videos to share on whatsapp. Evil manipulators, people who are doing it for laughs, well intentioned but misguided good samaritans? As a result of such forwards, whatsapp rolled out a limit on how many times a message can be forwarded - a feature they have pushed worldwide recently. We don't need perfection to do damage, we need efficiency. We already have other systems which can make up the difference in results.