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 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.
but what are the criteria? just because you think you have a handle on it doesn’t mean everyone else does or even shares your conclusion. and there’s no metric here i can measure, to for example block it from my platform.
The criteria is whatever you put in the “no ai” policy on the site. Whether that be ‘you can’t post videos wholly generated from a prompt’ to ‘you can’t post anything that uses any form of neural net in the production chain’ to something in between. You can specify what types are and are not included and blanket ban/allow everything else. It can definitely be defined in the user agreement, the part that’s actually hard would be detection/enforcement.
my point is that it’s hard to program someone’s subjective, if written in whatever form of legalese, point of view into a detection system, especially when those same detection systems can be used to great effect to train systems to bypass them. any such detection system would likely be an “AI” in the same way the ones they ban are and would be similarly prone to mistakes and to reflecting the values of the company (read: Jack Dorsey) rather than enforcing any objective ethical boundary.
Every single comment I said that detecting them would be the hard part, I’ve been talking about defining the type of content that is allowed/banned not the part where they actually have to filter it.
Yeah I’m basically ignoring the part of implementing it as a separate issue from defining it, which is the part I’m saying is objective. Given a definition of what type of content they want to ban you should be able to figure out whether something you’re going to post is allowed or not, that’s why I’m saying it’s not subjective. Whether it can be detected if you post it anyways, would probably have to be based on reports, human reviewers and strict account bans if caught, with the burden of proof on the accused to prove it isn’t AI to have any chance of working at all. This would get abused, and be super obnoxious (and expensive) but it would probably work to a point.
Whether AI art is good is subjective, it will change based on the whims of who you ask and cannot be defined. Whether something is AI generated depends on what definition you use but given a definition it either fits it or it doesn’t. It’s not subjective it’s just a little broad. As far as it being hard to detect that has no bearing on whether it is or isn’t AI.
I don’t agree that having multiple definitions for something makes it subjective, what it makes it is vague. If you provide one one of those definitions to someone and ask them if something meets it (and for the sake of argument they have full knowledge of how it was created) they should always be able to come to the same conclusion. As I understand it, and the definitions you provided, what makes something subjective is whether it will be unique to the person evaluating it. If my definition of good art is it makes ME feel something, somebody else could look at the same thing I do and come to a different conclusion. You couldn’t build a model that filters out bad art based on that subjective definition. All I’ve been trying to say is that whether something is AI is something that is definable but apparently I’m being too fucking stupid to make that clear.
Honestly, at this point I don’t care enough any more to defend a throwaway comment I made so congratulations, you won, I’m an idiot I guess so I’ll go worship a charlatan or something.
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 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
deleted by creator
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.
but what are the criteria? just because you think you have a handle on it doesn’t mean everyone else does or even shares your conclusion. and there’s no metric here i can measure, to for example block it from my platform.
The criteria is whatever you put in the “no ai” policy on the site. Whether that be ‘you can’t post videos wholly generated from a prompt’ to ‘you can’t post anything that uses any form of neural net in the production chain’ to something in between. You can specify what types are and are not included and blanket ban/allow everything else. It can definitely be defined in the user agreement, the part that’s actually hard would be detection/enforcement.
my point is that it’s hard to program someone’s subjective, if written in whatever form of legalese, point of view into a detection system, especially when those same detection systems can be used to great effect to train systems to bypass them. any such detection system would likely be an “AI” in the same way the ones they ban are and would be similarly prone to mistakes and to reflecting the values of the company (read: Jack Dorsey) rather than enforcing any objective ethical boundary.
Every single comment I said that detecting them would be the hard part, I’ve been talking about defining the type of content that is allowed/banned not the part where they actually have to filter it.
i guess the point that’s being missed is that when i say “hard” i mean practically impossible
Yeah I’m basically ignoring the part of implementing it as a separate issue from defining it, which is the part I’m saying is objective. Given a definition of what type of content they want to ban you should be able to figure out whether something you’re going to post is allowed or not, that’s why I’m saying it’s not subjective. Whether it can be detected if you post it anyways, would probably have to be based on reports, human reviewers and strict account bans if caught, with the burden of proof on the accused to prove it isn’t AI to have any chance of working at all. This would get abused, and be super obnoxious (and expensive) but it would probably work to a point.
deleted by creator
Whether AI art is good is subjective, it will change based on the whims of who you ask and cannot be defined. Whether something is AI generated depends on what definition you use but given a definition it either fits it or it doesn’t. It’s not subjective it’s just a little broad. As far as it being hard to detect that has no bearing on whether it is or isn’t AI.
deleted by creator
I don’t agree that having multiple definitions for something makes it subjective, what it makes it is vague. If you provide one one of those definitions to someone and ask them if something meets it (and for the sake of argument they have full knowledge of how it was created) they should always be able to come to the same conclusion. As I understand it, and the definitions you provided, what makes something subjective is whether it will be unique to the person evaluating it. If my definition of good art is it makes ME feel something, somebody else could look at the same thing I do and come to a different conclusion. You couldn’t build a model that filters out bad art based on that subjective definition. All I’ve been trying to say is that whether something is AI is something that is definable but apparently I’m being too fucking stupid to make that clear.
deleted by creator
Honestly, at this point I don’t care enough any more to defend a throwaway comment I made so congratulations, you won, I’m an idiot I guess so I’ll go worship a charlatan or something.