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.
it’s already the case that the distinction between what’s “AI” and what isn’t is a subjective, aesthetic difference and not a technical one
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.
i guess the point that’s being missed is that when i say “hard” i mean practically impossible