4 ms·

Upload your fake text and images anywhere. Upload it everywhere. Upload it as yourself. Upload it on behest of your willing friends. Corrupt your face in dozens

Upload your fake text and images anywhere. Upload it everywhere. Upload it as yourself. Upload it on behest of your willing friends. Corrupt your face in dozens of ways, then tag each as yourself. When everything is garbage, shadow profiles will mean nothing, social credit scores will mean nothing, analytics will mean nothing. Centralization can be turned on its head - the watering hole will be revealed to be the dangerous cesspit it is. Create art until what can be monetized has no value. Create news that never happened, scoops that are only a distant fiction, until nothing on the internet can even be meaningfully reported on. The corrosive powers of mass memetics for the first time can be rendered entirely impotent.

naveen99 4y ago
Now you see why tribes form by evolution just as mutation does.
friesandties 4y ago
> Create art until what can be monetized has no value. A1.
sam0x17 4y ago
I'd be careful. By doing this you can use the date these AIs became readily available as a tool for bisecting between "legitimate profiles" before the year X and "potentially fake" profiles from after the year X, which can then be used to very effectively train an AI to tell the difference...
- rrobukef 4y ago
  Sure, it also mean limiting the dataset of our children (i.e. the bane of ML), it means bit-rot for existing datasets.
drdaeman 4y ago
While I honestly do want to support this approach because unlike the alternative it might (just "might", though) work, I regretfully must also admit that the huge problem with this is collateral damage. There are millions of humans out there that are either highly susceptible to or are already caught into believing all sorts of nonsense, getting scammed in all forms, costing them money, time, well-being and even lives. The issue with fake flood is that until the saturation/breaking point (when the understanding that existing trust system is fatally broken becomes truly mainstream) it's going to make this situation worse. What's extremely frustrating is that the only alternative I've ever seen proposed are forms of a never-ending moderation arms race, some variant of a "war on fakes". Which is even scarier in the long run, because while it mitigates the damages here and now (good), it would never solve the underlying problem, and only further cement some parts of it (enforced trust invites potential abuse). And as usual, humanity is currently stuck between two incredibly shitty options (traditionally going through a path of least resistance, no matter what could be at the end of it - because that's how large systems work), hopefully still searching for a magical third silver bullet.
- tetraca 4y ago
  > There are millions of humans out there that are either highly susceptible to or are already caught into believing all sorts of nonsense, getting scammed in all forms, costing them money, time, well-being and even lives. The issue with fake flood is that until the saturation/breaking point (when the understanding that existing trust system is fatally broken becomes truly mainstream) it's going to make this situation worse. The people who are willing to engage in charlatanism and mass manipulation are already enabled by this tooling and will use AI as a force multiplier whether we use it to jam the signal or not, and the results will be far, far worse for victims because these people will actually have directed, dangerous goals and agendas to push them toward rather than having them flail in a contradictory trash pile.
- BeFlatXIII 4y ago
  It’s only a problem that large numbers are easily duped no matter how much education we give them when it’s also coupled with no-questions-asked universal suffrage.
  - kashunstva 4y ago
    It depends in part on the quality of what is passed off as education. After twelve years of US public education in the 1970’s and 80’s, not once did critical thinking tools, types and sources of bias, and default-mode skepticism come up. I’d rather work on improving that, rather than making it even harder for citizens to vote.
    - BeFlatXIII 4y ago
      And the #1 way to improve educational outcomes is to figure out how to attract better candidates to be elementary teachers, NOT curriculum micromanagement (whether from elected school boards or directly from parents)
- moe091 4y ago
  I agree with your point, but also think this trajectory is kind of inevitable in a way. As we can already see, a LOT of people are living deep in a world of BS news stories and made up facts, to the point where they're basically in a different reality. Ideally, we'd find a way to go backwards from where we are now, maybe future generations will grow up with this flood of false info and learn to navigate it, but I think we reached a point where tech is developing so fast, and the world is changing so fast, that there were always be a large number of people who can't "keep up". Given that, this may be one of the few scenarios where I'm in favor of a kind of "accelerationism" - increase the problem to a breaking point as soon as possible so that we can deal with the fallout and recover from it now, rather than dealing with this horrible state of things for decades and decades as it slowly gets worse and worse, until we eventually reach a breaking point anyway and likely have an even worse fallout to recover from.
nine_k 4y ago
This reminds me of the great novel Fiasco by Stanislaw Łem [1]. The civilization described in the novel fills the entire radio spectrum with noise, to make efficient communication impossible (and possibly to also allow highly sophisticated noise-like encrypted communication be undetectable). Their society is pretty dystopian though. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiasco_(novel) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiasco_(novel)
- warpech 4y ago
  Also the book _The Cyberiad_ by Lem is now more relevant than ever. It is a set of short stories, mostly about messing with generative AI, AI assistants, etc.
moe091 4y ago
I was going to say this is a great idea but totally unfeasible due to the amount of cooperation required, enough people simply won't do it, but parts of it are kind of happening by default. e.g. with BS news stories and whatnot. Also I suppose a lot of it could be automated - fighting fire with fire in a way. I'm sure that would lead to a cat-and-mouse game of creating code for detecting and ignoring intentionally obfuscating content, then the other side coding their way around those detection systems, and then back and forth like that forever, similar to the pattern of: finding exploit -> patching exploit -> finding new exploit -> patching new exploit -> etc.
rikroots 4y ago
We didn't need the help of AI to do this to poetry already. It turns out that access to a text editor was more than sufficient.

naveen99 4y ago

Now you see why tribes form by evolution just as mutation does.

friesandties 4y ago

> Create art until what can be monetized has no value. A1.

sam0x17 4y ago

I'd be careful. By doing this you can use the date these AIs became readily available as a tool for bisecting between "legitimate profiles" before the year X and "potentially fake" profiles from after the year X, which can then be used to very effectively train an AI to tell the difference...

rrobukef 4y ago
Sure, it also mean limiting the dataset of our children (i.e. the bane of ML), it means bit-rot for existing datasets.

drdaeman 4y ago

While I honestly do want to support this approach because unlike the alternative it might (just "might", though) work, I regretfully must also admit that the huge problem with this is collateral damage. There are millions of humans out there that are either highly susceptible to or are already caught into believing all sorts of nonsense, getting scammed in all forms, costing them money, time, well-being and even lives. The issue with fake flood is that until the saturation/breaking point (when the understanding that existing trust system is fatally broken becomes truly mainstream) it's going to make this situation worse. What's extremely frustrating is that the only alternative I've ever seen proposed are forms of a never-ending moderation arms race, some variant of a "war on fakes". Which is even scarier in the long run, because while it mitigates the damages here and now (good), it would never solve the underlying problem, and only further cement some parts of it (enforced trust invites potential abuse). And as usual, humanity is currently stuck between two incredibly shitty options (traditionally going through a path of least resistance, no matter what could be at the end of it - because that's how large systems work), hopefully still searching for a magical third silver bullet.

tetraca 4y ago
> There are millions of humans out there that are either highly susceptible to or are already caught into believing all sorts of nonsense, getting scammed in all forms, costing them money, time, well-being and even lives. The issue with fake flood is that until the saturation/breaking point (when the understanding that existing trust system is fatally broken becomes truly mainstream) it's going to make this situation worse. The people who are willing to engage in charlatanism and mass manipulation are already enabled by this tooling and will use AI as a force multiplier whether we use it to jam the signal or not, and the results will be far, far worse for victims because these people will actually have directed, dangerous goals and agendas to push them toward rather than having them flail in a contradictory trash pile.
BeFlatXIII 4y ago
It’s only a problem that large numbers are easily duped no matter how much education we give them when it’s also coupled with no-questions-asked universal suffrage.
- kashunstva 4y ago
  It depends in part on the quality of what is passed off as education. After twelve years of US public education in the 1970’s and 80’s, not once did critical thinking tools, types and sources of bias, and default-mode skepticism come up. I’d rather work on improving that, rather than making it even harder for citizens to vote.
  - BeFlatXIII 4y ago
    And the #1 way to improve educational outcomes is to figure out how to attract better candidates to be elementary teachers, NOT curriculum micromanagement (whether from elected school boards or directly from parents)
moe091 4y ago
I agree with your point, but also think this trajectory is kind of inevitable in a way. As we can already see, a LOT of people are living deep in a world of BS news stories and made up facts, to the point where they're basically in a different reality. Ideally, we'd find a way to go backwards from where we are now, maybe future generations will grow up with this flood of false info and learn to navigate it, but I think we reached a point where tech is developing so fast, and the world is changing so fast, that there were always be a large number of people who can't "keep up". Given that, this may be one of the few scenarios where I'm in favor of a kind of "accelerationism" - increase the problem to a breaking point as soon as possible so that we can deal with the fallout and recover from it now, rather than dealing with this horrible state of things for decades and decades as it slowly gets worse and worse, until we eventually reach a breaking point anyway and likely have an even worse fallout to recover from.

nine_k 4y ago

This reminds me of the great novel Fiasco by Stanislaw Łem [1]. The civilization described in the novel fills the entire radio spectrum with noise, to make efficient communication impossible (and possibly to also allow highly sophisticated noise-like encrypted communication be undetectable). Their society is pretty dystopian though. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiasco_(novel) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiasco_(novel)

warpech 4y ago
Also the book _The Cyberiad_ by Lem is now more relevant than ever. It is a set of short stories, mostly about messing with generative AI, AI assistants, etc.

moe091 4y ago

I was going to say this is a great idea but totally unfeasible due to the amount of cooperation required, enough people simply won't do it, but parts of it are kind of happening by default. e.g. with BS news stories and whatnot. Also I suppose a lot of it could be automated - fighting fire with fire in a way. I'm sure that would lead to a cat-and-mouse game of creating code for detecting and ignoring intentionally obfuscating content, then the other side coding their way around those detection systems, and then back and forth like that forever, similar to the pattern of: finding exploit -> patching exploit -> finding new exploit -> patching new exploit -> etc.

rikroots 4y ago

We didn't need the help of AI to do this to poetry already. It turns out that access to a text editor was more than sufficient.