Note: My opinion is that I am neutral/do not like or dislike historical media, I am not a historian, but I do dislike those awful Twitter spammers that steal ra

Note: My opinion is that I am neutral/do not like or dislike historical media, I am not a historian, but I do dislike those awful Twitter spammers that steal random "historical image of the day", often with a completely wrong caption, stolen content, no sourcing, and then post affiliate links all over them. I have previously done professional work with ML/AI. -- I can kind of understand this if it was made very obvious that it was "AI generated"; that is, the colours are totally invented and made out of thin air, that spaces might be filled in with random computer generated content to support upscaling and make it look better. I don't want a machine-generated random filler content to be repurposed for "oh, here is a source video for the skin colour of specific people back in the day" or "you see those marks in the corner (that didn't exist in the original source), those are hieroglyphs" AI does not mean you magically get colour restored to an image that did not have any in the first place, it is invented, machine created content that potentially has absolutely zero bearing on the real world. Additionally, stuff like this ends up ranking higher than the original source content; preference is given to HD+ videos in search, "viral cool colourised version of the past" on instagram will rank higher than "actual history"; it is potentially a large problem when you have people that don't actually know how to separate genuine primary source vs computer generated content.