[goshx]

This is much needed. I’ve had family members sending me videos about what looked like news when in fact it was 100% AI. There are photorealistic AI videos pretending to be an old man giving life advice, or business advice, etc. and the disclosures were all the way at the bottom of the video description, very hard to find.

[emn13]

Note that the uploader apparently still retains control over labeling in most cases; uploaders that intentionally misrepresent AI-generated content might not be discouraged by this. Whether youtube will (and can) ban accounts that do that might determine in practice if this matters or not.

[imp0cat]

Oh so that explains the recent explosion of "old man gives life advice" videos!

[verisimi]

> in fact it was 100% AI

And you know that how?

And, how do you know news itself is not 100% ai? News corps may simply fail to disclose that it was ai, be taken in, remove watermarks, etc.

The fact is no one can say what one sees on a screen is a true representation of reality. People are acting on a consensus feeling.

[ramonga]

> the disclosures were all the way at the bottom of the video description

[verisimi]

Anyone can write anything, it doesn't make it true.

Eg, I can say: "ai wrote this comment".

Or I can say: "ai did not write this comment".

Looking at the comments alone does not tell you whether they were or were not written by ai. Same for videos.

What is going on is that you are trusting the disclosure is significant and real. So, when you see the disclosure you are concluding something on the basis of TRUST. Same for the video itself.

Seeing something on a screen does not make it a true representation of reality. You do not know reality; you only know that you saw a video. This applies to disclosure, video, comments - anything on a screen.

[dankwizard]

As a large language model, I did not write this comment