5 ms·
It’s like it was specifically built for Fox News… But for real, this is bad. Like, really, really bad. And I understand this could have been done before by jus
by centuryfall 2mo ago
It’s like it was specifically built for Fox News…
But for real, this is bad. Like, really, really bad. And I understand this could have been done before by just screenshotting an image from Google Maps and feeding into an AI image processor, but now, that whole process is streamlined and immediately available, and Google’s messaging is that we can just fact check it ourselves with another AI tool.
Well, that’s only possible with the original, non-altered image. Someone takes a screenshot and puts this up on a news broadcast or Twitter post, and then, how is anyone going to determine what is real or fake anymore?
- willtemperley 2mo ago> how is anyone going to determine what is real or fake anymore Through using AI to build tools that generate results with a verified chain of provenance.
- lwansbrough 2mo agoThis is satire right?
- Crespyl 2mo ago> "No, these are ground-truth pixels" - Disclosure Day (2026)
- willtemperley 2mo agoNo. What isn't reasonable about this approach? I think most people have got GeoAI backwards, creating derived imagery via AI is a terrible idea. Building better tools than we have with AI, using existing geoscience principles is absolutely the right approach.
- copper-float 2mo agoAll media conglomerates will have a field day with this. CNN, MSNBC, and Fox have all been caught doing exactly these kinds of things. Don't act like the left has never lied or manipulated their stories, they're all equally terrible and soulless.
- margalabargala 2mo agoYes, CNN has done it 13 times, MSNBC 27, and FOX well over 12,000 and counting. You can say "these are all the same" but if you can't see why people single out FOX that says a lot about your credibility.