[ArcaneMoose]

I'm curious where the line is.. several ambiguous but common scenarios:

- Occasional AI b-roll during explainer videos

- AI generated backing track (music)

- AI generated shots sprinkled in a short film

- Showing examples of AI video as an AI capability update or commentary

[harimau777]

I'd say that if anything AI generated ends up in the final product then it should be labeled as AI made. So using AI as a prototyping tool would be fine but using it either to generate the end product itself or using it to generate a script would require tagging.

[doginasuit]

I watched a documentary recently that had an indicator in the top right corner when the content was AI generated. I found it incredibly helpful.

Every online video platform should let you label specific segments as AI generated, even better if it is a requirement with validation checks for certain kinds of content.

[jagged-chisel]

That’s the creator doing that, right? Is YT going to analyze the whole video and put a label on every frame?

[doginasuit]

Yes, it seems like the creator applying the label is the most scalable approach. But you could have the requirement and random sampling with consequences if it isn't followed. You could also sample based on video traffic and user reports.

It's a really valuable feature that I expect will eventually be the gold standard, it was surprising how helpful it was. I think a lot of creators will embrace it, it adds credibility/authenticity. You aren't just labeling the AI content, you are labeling the content that isn't generated by AI, with a validation layer to back it up.

[dmix]

Plenty of big artists like Kanye use AI to experiment with ideas before releasing the full studio recordings. That’s going to become more common. Just like how developers use LLMs to make a POC to test new ideas before putting the hard work into making it real.

[tayo42]

People still admit to listening to Kanye since he started talking about his love of Hitler?

[terio]

People are still buying Teslas?

[zulban]

It's about information, not one all encompassing yes or no. All of those are good pieces of information to include in a disclosure.

[ArcaneMoose]

More scenarios:

- AI generated VFX on top of non-AI video

- AI upscaling of low res footage

- AI frame interpolation for synthetic slow-mo

- Modified / composited AI video

- Footage created by "Extend Scene" features in Premiere Pro and others

- Word correction from tools like Descript

- AI relighting or colorization

- Reaction video to a video containing AI-generated content

And in general, what amount of combination of any of these applications constitutes as "AI generated"? If I have a 30 minute video with a 3 second AI generated clip, do I get the same label as full-blown AI slop video?

[autoexec]

All of them in any amount and yes, your specific 3 seconds should be labeled as being AI generated in your video (or description) and your entire video should be labeled as made using AI by youtube.

A 30 minute speech by a president where I use AI to change 3 seconds in order to make that person say something they never did should also get the label. The label shouldn't be about how much AI was used, but that it was used at all.

[anshorei]

Why does this mean AI-aided color correction, 25fps to 30fps, or upscaling 480p to 1080p should be treated the same? Using AI to make someone say something different (even if only for a small part of the video) is very clearly different, that's deception. Why does AI editing 3 seconds of audio from a president's speech be treated different from when a human does it without AI?

It sounds like your argument is about deceptive editing. Why not just require labelling deceptive editing? That way there can be place for comedy channels to do so for comedic purpose (rather than blanket ban on deceptive edits).

Almost any photograph taken with a mobile phone is AI edited because phones come with AI to enhance photo quality (e.g. Deep Fusion, Smart HDR), should any photo taken with a mobile camera be labelled AI now?

[autoexec]

> Why does this mean AI-aided color correction, 25fps to 30fps, or upscaling 480p to 1080p should be treated the same?

You may not be old enough to remember seeing it, but notices like "This film has been modified from its original version. It has been formatted to fit this screen" were put there for a reason. It was to avoid legislation which would have forced distributors to disclose that the product they were delivering was not the same as what people saw in theaters because it was considered deceptive to hide that fact. Altering of someone else's video should always be disclosed. That includes upscaling and color alterations even when they aren't done using AI and should absolutely be done when AI is inserting a bunch of fake frames.

When using AI to edit your own content deception is much less of a concern, but yes the use of AI should still be disclosed. There are clearly people who want to know when AI is being used to create something. There's no harm in having the label there, it just makes it easier for people to decide if and how to view your work. What value is there in hiding your use of AI from others in cases where you aren't trying to trick them?

Also yes, cell phone cameras should be required to clearly disclose that the photos they take to not reflect reality, and include the fact that they are edited with AI in meta-data. I've had friends complain that the photos their phones were taking were automatically edited and there was no option to disable those edits. They were upset because they intentionally wanted photos that reflected the real world and ultimately were forced to switch to using other cameras to get the accuracy they needed. As far as I'm concerned cell phone cameras doing that are simply defective. People should be aware of that fact before they use cell phone cameras for things like evidence collection, pictures of medial concerns, and for anything where accuracy matters more than what some algorithm thinks you'd rather see than the truth.

[tliltocatl]

> - AI upscaling of low res footage

I'd say this is far more problematic than plain slop.

[mvdtnz]

Other than your last bullet point I don't see anything ambiguous. It's a very clear line. I do not want to see an explainer video with AI generated content, end of story.

[ArcaneMoose]

I absolutely hate those full-blown AI 'explainers' that just have AI voiceover and a bunch of auto-placed b-roll. I don't want to see them. But I don't think that falls in the same bucket as a creative short film with some AI-generated SFX or someone doing a tutorial with an AI-generated lofi track in the background.

[jefftk]

Deepfakes in VFX is another borderline one.