3 ms·

We do pause, we do reflect. And our conclusion is that it's "us" who have changed, not the impact of technology. So you can make pictures and 3d models from te

We do pause, we do reflect. And our conclusion is that it's "us" who have changed, not the impact of technology. So you can make pictures and 3d models from text descriptions. So you can get a voice to say something. But if you were determined to do bad things, you already could. It would be easy enough to hire an actor who sounds like Obama and make him say something outrageous. It would be easy enough to use Photoshop to make disgusting images. Are you sure it's the capabilities you fear, and not the people who now for the first time will get access to them? Are you sure "we", the wealthy, the technologically and educationally resourceful, the powerful, are so much better custodians?

afarrell 4y ago
If something is dangerous, that does not justify making it worse.
Bakary 4y ago
It's not about class-based custodianship but rather the simple fact that the number of attempts like these will multiply like wildfire. You won't need to be determined, you'll just need five minutes with the software before heading to work.
ajmurmann 4y ago
I have no string opinion on this very complex topic, but want to add that this is an area where the quote "sometimes quantity had a quality in its own" applies. Brennan's flooding the zone with shit propaganda methodology to me is One of the biggest challenges to democracy functioning. We might be able to debunk a handful of fake videos on the public discourse. What would happen if they're are suddenly thousands? Maybe we'd fight better ways to establish truth and a shared reality. Maybe democracy would utterly collapse. Ultimately, I don't think we'll able to keep the cat in the bag though. If nothing else, nation actors like Russia or China will get their hands on it and crank the propaganda machine with it. We might be better prepared if we just shorten the learning process and give everyone access. That might open some hope that we'll be able to adapt. It's a really scary dice roll though.
- bogwog 4y ago
  I think people will adapt by finally doing the thing they should have been doing all along: don't trust anything they see on the internet. Maybe a flood of AI-generated propaganda is what it will finally take to get the average person to realize that the internet is (and always has been) overflowing with manipulative garbage made by people with bad intentions. So maybe the next time they see a video of <political opponent> kicking a puppy in the face, their first thought will be "maybe this video is fake?" rather than instant outrage. I think most people aren't gullible/naive, but for some reason that part of their brain that protects them from being exploited/manipulated/ripped off/tricked/etc completely shuts down whenever the internet is involved. Maybe increased exposure can change that?
  - amanaplanacanal 4y ago
    People seem willing to believe anything as long as it fits with their preconceived notions about how the world works. I’m not confident this will ever change.
  - NateEag 4y ago
    > I think people will adapt by finally doing the thing they should have been doing all along: don't trust anything they see on the internet. This is an impressively optimistic take. Why do you think this will happen? Gelman amnesia has been happening for at least centuries, with no sign of reduction that I'm aware of.
    - bogwog 4y ago
      Because society/people are good at adaptation. Currently, the misinformation problem is big, but it’s not so big that it’s obvious to even the dumbest people… or at the very least it’s too recent a phenomenon for most people to have fully grasped it yet. It’s like advertisements. Banner ads used to be very effective, but they were so pervasive that now people are blind to them. Doesn’t matter how big and flashy it is, most people will literally not see it because their brain is blocking it out somehow. Personally, whenever I see something outrageous on social media, my immediate reaction is always “this is probably fake, and someone is trying to make me angry”. Not because I’m actively trying to remain skeptical, but because I’ve been on the internet long enough to have experienced being misled by similar stuff. If you burn your hand touching a hot stove, you learn to be careful around stoves for the rest of your life. Sure, you can learn that lesson without having to burn your hand, but if you need a guarantee that the lesson is learned, getting burned will do that.

afarrell 4y ago

If something is dangerous, that does not justify making it worse.

Bakary 4y ago

It's not about class-based custodianship but rather the simple fact that the number of attempts like these will multiply like wildfire. You won't need to be determined, you'll just need five minutes with the software before heading to work.

ajmurmann 4y ago

I have no string opinion on this very complex topic, but want to add that this is an area where the quote "sometimes quantity had a quality in its own" applies. Brennan's flooding the zone with shit propaganda methodology to me is One of the biggest challenges to democracy functioning. We might be able to debunk a handful of fake videos on the public discourse. What would happen if they're are suddenly thousands? Maybe we'd fight better ways to establish truth and a shared reality. Maybe democracy would utterly collapse. Ultimately, I don't think we'll able to keep the cat in the bag though. If nothing else, nation actors like Russia or China will get their hands on it and crank the propaganda machine with it. We might be better prepared if we just shorten the learning process and give everyone access. That might open some hope that we'll be able to adapt. It's a really scary dice roll though.

bogwog 4y ago
I think people will adapt by finally doing the thing they should have been doing all along: don't trust anything they see on the internet. Maybe a flood of AI-generated propaganda is what it will finally take to get the average person to realize that the internet is (and always has been) overflowing with manipulative garbage made by people with bad intentions. So maybe the next time they see a video of <political opponent> kicking a puppy in the face, their first thought will be "maybe this video is fake?" rather than instant outrage. I think most people aren't gullible/naive, but for some reason that part of their brain that protects them from being exploited/manipulated/ripped off/tricked/etc completely shuts down whenever the internet is involved. Maybe increased exposure can change that?
- amanaplanacanal 4y ago
  People seem willing to believe anything as long as it fits with their preconceived notions about how the world works. I’m not confident this will ever change.
- NateEag 4y ago
  > I think people will adapt by finally doing the thing they should have been doing all along: don't trust anything they see on the internet. This is an impressively optimistic take. Why do you think this will happen? Gelman amnesia has been happening for at least centuries, with no sign of reduction that I'm aware of.
  - bogwog 4y ago
    Because society/people are good at adaptation. Currently, the misinformation problem is big, but it’s not so big that it’s obvious to even the dumbest people… or at the very least it’s too recent a phenomenon for most people to have fully grasped it yet. It’s like advertisements. Banner ads used to be very effective, but they were so pervasive that now people are blind to them. Doesn’t matter how big and flashy it is, most people will literally not see it because their brain is blocking it out somehow. Personally, whenever I see something outrageous on social media, my immediate reaction is always “this is probably fake, and someone is trying to make me angry”. Not because I’m actively trying to remain skeptical, but because I’ve been on the internet long enough to have experienced being misled by similar stuff. If you burn your hand touching a hot stove, you learn to be careful around stoves for the rest of your life. Sure, you can learn that lesson without having to burn your hand, but if you need a guarantee that the lesson is learned, getting burned will do that.