[Yaqub_W]

"It is a matter not only of customer protection, it’s also a matter of democracy protection."

Ensuring democracy by selectively censoring. I feel safer already.

I better put AI label on every video I make as there is already AI in the supply chain of all the tech I use. All content contains AI now.

Let's talk about AI commissars who will decide which company will survive. In fact, let's create a few an NGOs to help! NGO will tell commissar what he wants to hear, NGO will get rewarded and allowed to exist!

I doubt EU will survive the next decade or two without major crisis or war tbh.

Edit: Instead of downvoting, how about you try retorting? I don't think I'm incorrect here. But maybe I am!

[lelanthran]

I am seeing more and more this exact sentiment that is in this comment: "I should be able to bamboozled everyone into thinking I have skills I actually don't have anymore".

Look, there's a ton of places where you can display your AI code, products or comments. Why is it so damn important that no places remain for people who want to be aware of whether or not they are engaging with a human?

Why is it so important to you that users must not be aware?

[RandomLensman]

My suspicion is that it will quickly not matter in a lot 9f situations for most users, customers, etc. - so might be easier and better to curate places of true human interaction, for example, instead of the other way around.

[lelanthran]

The outcome will be that places insisting on human content will become more valuable, not less.

Even the most ardent AI booster wants their slop to be viewed by human eyeballs, ironically.

[movedx01]

Slapping an explicit "I did not put effort into this" label on slop content is not censorship, its quite opposite, it lets people filter out the noise. No human can hope to be able to do this on their own at the scale GPUs can pump out tokens.

Authentic voices are today being drowned in waves upon waves of AI slop spam. This is not quite censorship but the end effect is similar - human voice cannot be heard. Just this time not because someone stopped the human from talking, but because they as shouting 1000x louder instead, at pennies on the dollar it costs to create something truly valuable.

[RandomLensman]

Some generic picture used as like icon: is the labeling critical there?

[movedx01]

Probably not critical, just helpful to be able to understand where the source is willing to cut corners. Helps me understand if the given content source values are aligned with mine without risking wasting time to ingest slop just to come to the same conclusion.

The same way I look at food labels to support local produce and those who don't try to trick me into thinking I am consuming something it's really not.

I personally wouldn't care for AI usage in icons, I don't put a lot of attention to them. Someone else might.

[RandomLensman]

Buying a license for a stock photo vs using AI to create what you need is cutting corners? Don't thing there is much difference in effort (might even be more on the latter)?

[movedx01]

Buying a license for a stock photo is paying someone who has put the effort.

Well, okay, I am not sure how much effort goes into creating your typical stock photo, probably not a lot, just still more than 0 effort it takes for the AI to generate it.

And yes, I see difference between an automated system flooding the web with AI generated "news" in disguise vs a niche blogger using AI to iterate on an image with hand crafted prompts. Labels are not perfect, just better than nothing.

[RandomLensman]

Compliance burden tend to favor the large, which is not what I think is a direction that needs more pushing into.

(I also think that labels will quickly become just "background noise" that is mostly ignored.)

[dathinab]

requiring deep fakes to be labeled as deep fakes has nothing to do with censorship

there is also nothing selectively about it, it applies to all deep fake equally

if you had read the article you would know that this is mainly about deep fakes and other deceptive content, not every use of an AI tool (e.g. line smoothing) requires an AI label, specifically it's only about content "generative AI" usage _in a context where it's potentially deceptive_.

> AI commissars who will decide which company will survive

a huge jump in logic not related to anything in this article

> I doubt EU will survive the next decade or two without major crisis or war tbh.

again unrelated, but any country which doesn't fights deep fake propaganda will most likely not survive as a democratic state of law, soo if anything this action increases the chance of survival

> Edit: Instead of downvoting, how about you try retorting?

- then maybe read the article properly, your comments put it highly in question you did

- also maybe don't have non logically sustained jumps in reasoning in your article, especially not when you jumps in reasoning come with tons of sarcasm

> I don't think I'm incorrect here. But maybe I am!

well yes, you have even missed the long known, explicitly pointed out sever threat deep fake propaganda is for any state and especially democracies. That is not a good bases for any argument.

Also passive aggressive edits are a good way to get even more down votes if anything.

[Yaqub_W]

Pros: none

Content label doesn't transform the content. It just provides a false sense of category.

I still have to think critically whether there is a label or not.

Cons: New ways for sociopaths for corruption, embezzlement and censorship.

That is my point.

This idea that legislation has no downsides is extremely naive and borderline retarded. Look at proposed legislation from the point of someone who wants to destroy everything. Does it provide a path to that goal? Is the risk worth it?

Every government grows over time and produces more and more suffering while consuming more and more wealth. I recommend reading The Gulag Archipelago. Your thinking seems to be dangerously naive to you and people around you.

[rsynnott]

Labelling stuff as “this was made by a magic robot” is not censorship. Don’t be silly.

[Yaqub_W]

I'm OK with it if no action is taken when content is not labeled and public officials work for free.

Label doesn't prove anything. It just provides a false sense of certainty.

[dudefeliciano]

what's the alternative? Let our benevolent techbro oligarch overlords decide what is best for us?

[Yaqub_W]

I think there is no alternative that yields good results.

Legacy media uses the argument that consumer already expects to be lied to and knows the content is for entertainment (TV news for example). I feel the same about AI content.

Or should I be expected to blindly trust everything? I already have to critically think and filter everything already so why the distinction? I should try harder for some content and not another? Especially as AI gets better the distinction between AI and no-AI generated content gets blurrier.

All I see is bureaucrats trying to grab more power over people's decisions and more money embezzled. Unelected people forcing rules on their subjects.

[DarkNova6]

Nihilism is the path to death and destruction. Thinking this will makes you powerless and cedes control with those who have the most resources.

It's easy to take yourself out of this equation, but it only makes everything worse. The trick is that they make you think that it couldn't get worse. But this is always false.

[Yaqub_W]

Can you elaborate? I have hard time seeing nihilism here. (there may be language barrier and/or definition issue at play - maybe?)

With definition of nihilism along the lines of `the rejection of all religious and moral principles, in the belief that life is meaningless`

The point I am making (or trying to) is quite the opposite. Bureaucrats seem to be introducing more violence and even more problems while resolving none. I still have to critically about the content I consume regardless of it having some label. But now tax money goes towards this instead of the things citizens voted for.

[dudefeliciano]

You think that the status quo sucks and that there is no alternative, that's your prerogative. But why do you complain about people who think there is an alternative and try to implement it?

[Yaqub_W]

No issues with people thinking anything. Big issues with people using violence and death threats enforcing their image of the world though.

As long as it's privately or voluntarily funded and no violence or coercion is used, then I don't really care.

[dudefeliciano]

I don't think not labeling an AI generated image will result in violence or death threats. Do you also feel that speed limits are a governmental overreach?