Me too. And to be honest, the simple idea of a contact constantly sitting on my eyeball makes me squirm.
Reasons I'm too squeamish for contacts #407
As someone who works in the field of criminal law (in Europe, and I would be shocked if it wasn't the same in the US) - I'm not actually very worried about this. By that I don't mean to say it's not a problem, though.
The risk of evidence being tampered with or outright falsified is something that already exists, and we know how to deal with it. What AI will do is lower the barrier for technical knowledge needed to do it, making the practice more common.
While it's pretty easy for most AI images to be spotted by anyone with some familiarity with them, they're only going to get better and I don't imagine it will take very long before they're so good the average person can't tell.
In my opinion this will be dealt with via two mechanisms:
-
Automated analysis of all digital evidence for signatures of AI as a standard practice. Whoever can be the first person to land contracts with police departments to provide bespoke software for quick forensic AI detection is going to make a lot of money.
-
A growth in demand for digital forensics experts who can provide evidence on whether something is AI generated. I wouldn't expect them to be consulted on all cases with digital evidence, but for it to become standard practice where the defence raises a challenge about a specific piece of evidence during trial.
Other than that, I don't think the current state of affairs when it comes to doctored evidence will particularly change. As I say, it's not a new phenomenon, so countries already have the legal and procedural framework in place to deal with it. It just needs to be adjusted where needed to accommodate AI.
What concerns me much more than the issue you raise is the emergence of activities which are uniquely AI dependent and need legislating for. For example, how does AI generated porn of real people fit into existing legislation on sex offences? Should it be an offence? Should it be treated differently to drawing porn of someone by hand? Would this include manually created digital images without the use of AI? If it's not decided to be illegal generally, what about when it depicts a child? Is it the generation of the image that should be regulated, or the distribution? That's just one example. What about AI enabled fraud? That's a whole can of worms in itself, legally speaking. These are questions that in my opinion are beyond the remit of the courts and will require direction from central governments and fresh, tailor made legislation to deal with.
Disney+
I'm learning a language as a hobby and Disney+ BY FAR is the most consistent in having dubs and subs available in a variety of languages. I haven't actually watched anything that didn't have it (for the language I'm learning). Whereas most things on other streaming sites don't tend to have it at all unless it's a foreign film and that's the original language.
For me, it's easily worth the money just for that
The censorship on Tiktok is crazy. The AI based comment removal is completely arbitrary - for example, I once had a comment removed for calling a public figure a walnut. Meanwhile, the comments are absolutely packed with the most vile comments. In particular, for content relating to my country there are thousands of comments openly celebrating and glorifying the deaths of migrants and some seriously explicitly racist rhetoric. It leads to people using silly workarounds to content filters that must be trivially easy to identify automatically, but aren't, raising the question of why bother with such extreme censorship in the first place?
It's interesting to see how the mental gymnastics attempt to avoid this. I sometimes look at Tiktok and if you go to the comments on anything Russia/Ukraine related it's very clear to see which accounts are bots/stooges and what their narrative instructions are.
Their favourite thing to do is to equate the West and Russia. That both do the same thing, and Russia is just more honest about it. Which I can sort of at least understand to some extent from a foreign policy perspective. But these accounts will earnestly say that the West does the same. including assassinating political rivals and this sort of shit. They also equate Ukraine wanting to join NATO as equivalent to Russia invading the country.
I'm in my 20s and always thought I was aging pretty badly but jeez yeah he fully looks mid to late 40s. A good mid to late 40s but definitely no younger if I were to guess.
........okay fine, I have a lump around my ass ring and maybe this convinced me to finally get it checked
He's even force choking those ones in the background
Good. That's why kids are so lazy these days. Back in my day battling demons and carrying a flask of holy water taught us a thing or two about life. I for one welcome the pro satanic portal stance of this administration.
Day-tah
But I'm from the UK. Anything else would sound bizarre with my accent
That was an interesting read. Are you aware of any cities or towns which are built in a more European style with pedestrians in mind? I'm actually considering a few jobs in the states right now but I'm quite put off by how car reliant everything is.
I literally just reworded the same point but ok
It's not a false dichotomy because it IS a dichotomy. It's a binary decision. You either legalise capital punishment and accept the risk of executing someone innocent or you don't legalise it. That is the choice.
But this is a case of all or nothing. You either say the death penalty IS acceptable or it ISN'T. There is no in between. So highlighting a case with certainty doesn't address the issue of cases with less certainty.