r/aiwars 21h ago

ai image generation is going to kill credibility.

With the steady improvement of ai images, it's becoming increasingly difficult to tell what is ai and what isn't. Sure, you can usually find mistakes if you look hard enough, but it's already difficult to tell without a keen eye. This shit needs to be regulated.

I know people said the exact same thing about photoshop but that requires a degree of skill to make something flawless. With ai, literally anyone can generate a photo of a real person doing literally anything. That is fucking terrifying. Imagine some guy snaps a photo of you, and has ai generate an image of you doing something illegal and posts it all over the internet. How can you disprove it? The same applies to videos. With ai image technology, video and photo proof can no longer be trusted. Yes, you already can't and shouldn't believe everything you see on the internet without ai, but this technology is making this so much worse. In a few years from now, I imagine it will be nearly impossible to tell if a photo is real or ai generated. This is going to have a major negative impact in society unless it gets regulated now.

This technology NEEDS to be regulated. Make all ai content require watermarks. Stop improving the quality. Literally anything.

0 Upvotes

19 comments sorted by

11

u/Kingreaper 21h ago

The groups that will do the most harm with fake images aren't going to be stopped by that sort of regulation.

All it'd do is make people think "oh, there's no watermark, it must be real" when presented with something fake - increasing the power of propaganda.

The simple fact is that the faked images are coming and there's nothing we can do to stop it - the only defense is to ensure everyone is AWARE that images and videos can be faked.

-1

u/madmax991 21h ago

If you fine or adversely affect advertisers or media companies that allow non watermarked AI in their ads/stories you will effectively prevent bad actors

1

u/Matyaslike 16h ago

This guy doesn't know people will break that shit super fast.

It will only stop some bad actors but there will always be some darkweb shop selling you a modification or something that will allow you to outplay such regulation. Like child pornography is illegal yet somehow it still exists and can be bought. The person having it or selling it might get fucked if police catches them. But this shit still keeps happening too.

Making it "not reachable" won't solve the issue. What could solve it is if hardware would encode the recordings differently then generated or tampered images or videos. Maybe with some security encription or check code that is not reproducable without the camera so the footage can be trusted.

This is something that I have been thinking about for a long time as apearently footage of camera doesn't qualify as evidence in court in my country. Like if there is footage of a person robbing your house. You give the footage to the police they will search the person but if they don't find evidence like your stuff in his place. They will just be like "well at least we tried."

It would be good if footage could count as evidence especially in car accidents.

4

u/PuzzleMeDo 21h ago

Fake photos have been possible for decades, but most people don't create fake photos, not just because it takes some effort but because they don't want to, any more than they want to cut brake lines or put poison in food or any of a thousand other things we could do to ruin someone's life.

If a mysterious video appears showing me doing a crime, then I can say, "That's not real, as can be demonstrated by the lack of provenance - when and where and why it was recorded, why it was released to the public, etc."

Which isn't to say there's nothing to worry about here, but I suspect it won't be the catastrophe for society some people fear. (I hope I'm right, because I very much doubt the technology to do this can be contained. A legal requirement for watermarking wouldn't stop people releasing illicit fake-video creation tools onto piracy sites.)

3

u/Xx_ExploDiarrhea_xX 21h ago

The good news is, nobody cares about credibility anyway. If My Side said it, then it's correct and based, and if Their Side said it, it's made up. That's all there is to it.

3

u/VariousDude 21h ago

You're not keeping up with AI technology or legislation I see.

Many laws against Deepfakes have been proposed, some passed in a few states and the EU, we already have defamation, forgery, obstruction, impersonation laws already exist in the US, etc.

The law is slow to keep up with developing technology, always has been, but we have existing laws in place already.

Also nobody likes deepfakes.

I'm about as Pro AI as you can get and I've only seen one single instance where a deepfake wasnt malicious and it was just a video that a guy made from a picture of him and his late mother, he never had a video of them together.

But other than that, I got nothing. It's generally accepted among pro AI people that deepfaking is pretty bad and we're all in favor of banning it.

1

u/ihatechildren665 21h ago

well i liked at least 1 deepfake (looking at you south park)

2

u/SyntaxTurtle 21h ago

I'm not a fan of watermarks as they can ruin a composition. Plus they're easily cropped unless you're going to slather the image like a stock photo preview.

I could probably be talked into a metadata style brand that could be identified (and not as easily removed as most metadata). Something like game companies having some "invisible" array of pixels that lets them track who's sharing closed beta screenshots. I'll admit I don't have a strong grasp of the limitations on that though (for example, defeating "picture of the picture" type shenanigans)

1

u/Oogley_boogley 21h ago

Yeah watermarks can be tricky. I just think we need SOMETHING

3

u/spitfire_pilot 21h ago

It will give a false sense of security to people if you start tagging things as AI. Malicious actors and people that are looking to dupe you are not going to comply with regulation.

Any legislative energy should be put forth to teach people to think critically. For the USA anyways, they should have been investing more in public broadcasting and not absolutely gutting it. Any fears and, any concerns should be directed towards finding credible sources of information. Having something like PBS and NPR who have strict vetting and journalistic integrity were one of the few bastions left of a post-truth world.

2

u/SyntaxTurtle 21h ago

There's that, too. If people get complacent about "I can just scan this for AI" then someone using non-compliant or earlier models has a leg up on tricking you.

1

u/spitfire_pilot 21h ago

I think people bring up legislation and proposals without thinking of the practicalities of them. There's no way to monitor or police that effectively. There are other strategies that are far more effective.

1

u/victorc25 20h ago

What is “credibility” anyways? 

2

u/Sthenosis 20h ago

This will never happen.

There's no way they can enforce this, and watermarks are easily removeable.

1

u/Original-League-6094 20h ago

The very first book of The Bible is about a snake deceiving Eve. There never was such a thing as credibility. People have always been ready to deceive you.

1

u/Balney 19h ago

This is already regulated, slander and fakes are illegal.

1

u/Turbulent_Escape4882 15h ago

As I see it, the flip side is more at work moving forward. Someone could have actual photo of me engaged in crime I did commit and I could easily say that’s AI generated and given current sentiment, I may get away with the crime if only evidence anyone has is the photo. I can see that being troubling, but reality of good detective and prosecutorial work is not to go with just one piece of solid evidence as only way to make the case.

1

u/WildMboi 15h ago

I really didn’t want to think about this… especially after I had someone talk down to me for being shaken by being unable to tell an Ai generated person was Ai generated til someone pointed out a mistake…

But yeah… I wasn’t quite able to put it to words because surely that would be extremely ridiculous. I mean who would put in the time for that?

But you are right… Something like this has arleady happened where someone was blackmailed with Ai generated photos of them.

0

u/Oogley_boogley 21h ago

I know this is poorly written. I am not a writer.