| Disturbing the way that we laugh off threats to democracy if they're 'exciting'. 09:50 - Apr 29 with 441 views | NthQldITFC |
There was a brief discussion at the end of Today (R4) about generative AI and the potential impact of fakes (audio, stills, video) on upcoming elections.
Whilst it's good that the discussion was had, there seemed to be a light-hearted acceptance between the presenter, the Demos lady and the Wikipedia bloke that political parties are going to indulge in AI shenanigans.
The Demos lady said that if a party is making a satirical (and realistic) fake, "just label it, just be open and transparent and truthful about it". That attitude seems to me to be a green light to political interests to 'accidentally' forget to label it or make the label removable etc.
Surely with something so important, with a technology so capable and with an electorate so vulnerable to deceit, there should be an absolute hard ban on any member of a political party making, endorsing or even pissing about with anything fake for 'satirical' purposes or any other. The threat to democracy is too great. |  |
| # WE ARE STEALING THE FUTURE FROM OUR CHILDREN --- WE MUST CHANGE COURSE # | | Poll: | It's driving me nuts |
| |  |
| Disturbing the way that we laugh off threats to democracy if they're 'exciting'. on 11:33 - Apr 29 with 335 views | CoachRob |
Is there any research on the impacts of generative AI? Should we maybe give the public a bit more credit when it comes to discerning what is truthful? Do we obsess too much about those attracted to weird conspiracy theories such as chemtrails, anti-vaxx or Neoclassical economics?
I think FLICC is an great acronym to remember when dealing with disinformation and no doubt we need to get better at communication, but I worry we start to demonise machine learning and AI - as you well know it is useful for improving our understanding of climate change.
Politicians are largely full of sh!t and people have become desensitized to that over time, I get the impression more and more vote on the basis of who will do the least harm and have given up on any idealistic notions of improving things.
F Fake Experts
L Logical Fallacies
I Impossible Expectations
C Cherry Picking
C Conspiracy Theories |  | | |
| Disturbing the way that we laugh off threats to democracy if they're 'exciting'. on 11:40 - Apr 29 with 309 views | lowhouseblue |
trouble is that this won't be done by parties or organisations capable of signing up to some code of good behaviour / transparency. it will be done anonymously either by fringe groups pushing one side ( a la trump hangers on) or more realistically by other groups who just want to create chaos and mistrust and despondency because they want to damage democracy. a lot of the anti-vax nonsense for example isn't pushed by people who really believe it but by actors who see it as a tool to build up up mistrust and alienation (and also make money). |  |
| And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show |
| |
| Disturbing the way that we laugh off threats to democracy if they're 'exciting'. on 11:40 - Apr 29 with 307 views | J2BLUE |
Deepfakes are going to cause havoc for society.
It needs regulating now. |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
