So what’s the angle? The Internet is getting flooded by AI slop. AI needs fresh REAL content to train with. That’s the angle. You are there to provide frsh amd original content to feed the AI.
Oh god, we have an AI incest flood ahead of us don’t we?
Thats a very good point and probably exactly the idea. Dorsey has always just been an actor that says one thing and thinks another.
It would be great if ALL social media platforms banned that garbage.
Or just had a filter to hide it. I don’t feel like banning something from everyone just because I personally don’t like it.
personally, I would ban it at the federal level and anytime you use it someone shows up at your house and destroys everything and throws away your computer. and then you go to jail. and then anyone who tries to visit you in jail gets punched in the face. and you have to eat poop in jail
I would and I’d have no problem with it at all. If people want AI slop, they can go find it where it is allowed.
There’s literally an app for it called Sora.
Hmmmm, must not be American.
Enforcing that ban is going to be difficult.
The ban doesn’t need a 100% perfect AI screening protocol to be a success.
Just the fact that AI is banned might appeal to a wide demographic. If the ban is actually enforced, even in just 25% of the most blatant cases, it might be just the push a new platform needs to take off.
They’re gonna use AI to detect the use of AI.
Ouroboros
Well the AI-based AI detector isn’t actively making creative people’s work disappear into a sea of gen-AI “art” at least.
There’s good and bad use cases for AI, I consider this a better use case than generating art. Now the question is whether or not it’s feasible to detect AI this way.
Indeed.
I have an Immich instance running on my home server that backs up my and my wife’s photos. It’s like an open source Google Photos.
One of its features is an local AI model that recognises faces and tags names on them, as well as doing stuff like recognising when a picture is of a landscape, food, etc.
Likewise, Firefox has a really good offline translation feature that runs locally and is open source.
AI doesn’t have to be bad. Big tech and venture capital is just choosing to make it so.
Not if I use AI to hide my use of AI first!
They are going to implement an AI detector detector detector.
Trace busta busta?
This one
It’s detectors all the way down.
But of course, as a tortoise, you would know that.
Did I seduce you a lot with my hard, polished shell? You can speak freely, nobody will ever know!
No, it was your intense, Gowron-like stare that truly drilled into my heart.
Glory to seduction! Glory to the empire!
But then they’ll implement an AI detector detector deflector.
Spoken like a true AI.
Seems that way:
Just the threat of being able to summarily remove AI content and hand out account discipline will cut down drastically on AI and practically eliminate the really low effort ‘slop’, it’s not perfect but it’s damn useful.
It’s also going to make it really easy to take down the content you don’t like, just accuse it of being AI and watch the witch hunting roll in. I’ve seen plenty of examples of traditional artists getting accused of using AI in other forums, I don’t imagine this will be any different.
People already mass report to abuse existing AI tools. It’s already starting to be accounted for and I can’t imagine it so much as slowing down implementing an anti AI rule if I’m being honest.
Just because something might be hard means we should give up before even trying?
Only if we let it be. There’s no technical reason why the origin of a video couldn’t have a signature generated by the capture device, or legally requiring AI models to do the same for any content they generate. Anything without an origin sticker is assumed to be garbage by default. Obviously there would need to be some way to make captures either anonymous or not at the user’s choice, and nation states can evade these things with sufficient effort like they always do, but we could cut a lot of slop out by doing some simple stuff like that.
while a phone signing a video to show that it was captured with the camera is possible, it will be easy too to fake the signature. all it would take would be a hacked device to steal the private key. and even if apple/google/samsung have perfectly secure systems to sign the origin of the video, there would be ton of cheaper phones that would likely won’t.
“Legally” doesn’t mean shit if it’s not enforceable. Besides, removing watermarks is trivial.
There is no technically rigorous way to filter AI content, unfortunately.
Loops ftw
What’s Loops?
TikTok but without users.
A Fediverse platform for short form video, made by the guy who makes Pixelfed
Not really just short form, it’s more of a take on video feeds rather than just the limited length quickcontent Vine was famous about.
Obviously the focus is still on short(ish) content format, but I see more and more people transition to longer videos to deliver content. On YT/Facebook most videos I see nowadays are 10min or above.
Vine, but federated!
More tiktok than vine, really
You’re not wrong, but an arbitrary maximum video length is the least of my problems with a Dorsey product
But does it ban AI content?
That would be based on the server’s policies, same as Lemmy or Mastodon.
I’d trust a federated environment a billion times more than anything Jack Dorsey is doing
Yeah, will never understand why these big billionaires keep taking these “we are for the people” stances, but are still trying to spin up these same ol for-profit, centralized products. If they really cared, they’d use that money to help nonprofits or decentralized services and stay out of the damn way.
It’s because it’s profitable, that’s why they do it. As long as they don’t Elon Musk, most people either don’t know who these people are or don’t care. And if they do go full EM, then most people still don’t care and it’s still profitable.
Yeah, they want money and clout
Banned for now…
deleted by creator
Another walled garden that will fracture the system even more and give even more credit to the open social web.
It is on nostr, I don’t like the protocol very much but it is decentralised
Is it decentralized like the fediverse or ‘decentralized’ in theory like bluesky?
Bluesky is decentralized, its just decentralized in a different way than Fediverse apps. A lot of fediverse people assume all decentralization would look like ActivityPub, so they just say its fake decentralization rather than learning how it works. (I know because I used to do the same, then I realized how little I understood it from this great blog post, and have since learned a lot more about it.)
There is already alternative infrastructure available (i.e. Blacksky and a variety of other applications hosted using ATProto (you can see a few here: https://bsky.social/about).
You can use any of these apps while maintaining full control of your own data by running your own PDS, or using any community maintained PDS. If you already have an account on the Bluesky PDS, you can migrate it, retaining all of your data. If you dont feel like migrating yet, you can also just export your rotation key, which would allow you to maintain control of your account even in the event that the Bluesky PDS does become evil or something.
Speaking of ATProto, sprk.so is a similar upcoming app, although I think its going to be more similar to TikTok than Vine.
Yes.
No
Maybe?
I don’t know, can you repeat the question?
You’re not the boss of me now!
He’s on third.
It is actually decentralised as far as I can tell, although I would like to point out that bluesky is also decentralised, while bsky.app has dominant market share, nothing stops anyone from hosting their own, completely independent, instance. Some have already done so.
And even with the large majority using bsky.app, the true decentralized nature of Bluesky is anyone can host the data server that contains the data for their account. Even if you keep using bsky.app as your frontend, your data can be kept on a self hosted PDS.
It still can’t function without an appview so PDS is not decentralized, but stuff like blacksky is. Hence people being reachableon some appviews and not others now, because of different moderation decisions.
Except it’s not a walled garden, it’s built on nostr.
https://divine.video/ - For people who want to see for themselves.
Also the android app from the TechCrunch article, seems like it was nuked though: https://divine.b-cdn.net/app-release.apk
In the main picture, about half of those videos use filters that do something based on the location of the person’s head. Unless they’ve changed the definition since I went to college, that would be classified as a type of computer vision, aka AI.
Yeah they just mean the more layperson understanding of AI as in AI-generated content or as YouTube Studio dubs it: “synthetic media” (pretty good term imo)
Basically just stuff that was “generated”.
I’m sure transformative use of ML like filters etc. would be fine. Even incorporation of generated elements in otherwise a normal video would be fine.
So “I know it when I see it” rules, rather than anything rigorously defined.
Assuming this gets any traction at all the witch hunts will be rampant.
Weird Al is gonna be devastated!
What’s that guy need so much water for anyway?!?!?
I like that the 7 second limit forces creativity. We shall see where this goes. Bet uploaded videos just get posted to more popular sites.
Or simplicity and reductive thought
Not it you want something impactful. Creativity and editing are tough to pack into 7 seconds.
Jack Dorsey can kick rocks.
Jack Dorsey 🤢
Errrr…
Pretty sure that PS5 classic controller didn’t come out 2013-2017. At least I hope it didn’t lol.
Also what the fuck is this haha:
6 seconds vids. What a joke
Lol the original vine is still my favorite dead platform. The comedy you can produce in 6 seconds is great.
It forces creativity, and sudden endings to things can be funny. I think it’s a better format than the long-ass “shorts” on YT or TikTok for short-form video content. Make it 6 seconds or make it 30 minutes.
it’s already the case that the distinction between what’s “AI” and what isn’t is a subjective, aesthetic difference and not a technical one
Detecting it is difficult but what actually is or isn’t AI should be pretty cut and dry. Either nothing completely generated, or no footage edited using generative ai (depending on how strict you want to be with your ban)
what about when the neural networks that power the DSP modules in all modern cell phones cameras? does a neural network filter that generates a 3D mesh or rather imposes a 3D projection, eg putting dog ears on yourself or Memojis, count? what if i record a real video and have Gemini/Veo/whatever edit the white balance? i don’t think it’s as cut and dry as most people think
Every single one of those I’d put under the second category. It’d be hard to detect but it’s certainly not subjective. It just depends on how it’s written.
most people, unfortunately, don’t seem to think when they see the letters ‘A’ and ‘I’… these people probably would burn sage at the sight of the identity matrix lol.
i think you’re probably wasting your breath here but you seem like you might be cool, so if you’re interested in discussing ML at all reach out fs!
