plausibly correlated with what?

This correlated with an earthquake - this is the event that should have triggered an inspection regardless.

> But when someone can generate plausible disaster photos of every inch of every line of a country's rail network in mere minutes?

In the UK (and elsewhere) a large percentage of track is covered by cameras - inspection of over the top claims can be rapidly dismissed.

> And as soon as your inspection finishes, they do it again?

Sounds like a case for cyber crimes and public nuisance.

It's also no different to endless prank calls via phone, not a new thing.

> This correlated with an earthquake…

Plenty of disasters don't. "No earthquake, no incident" obviously can't be the logic tree.

> In the UK (and elsewhere) a large percentage of track is covered by cameras - inspection of over the top claims can be rapidly dismissed.

"Yes. That doesn't do much to detect a stone from a parapet rolling onto the line though. Hence the need for inspection."

Sounds like you now agree it's less a need?

> Sounds like a case for cyber crimes and public nuisance.

"Sorry, not much we can do." As is the case when elderly folks get their accounts drained over the phone today.

> It's also no different to endless prank calls via phone, not a new thing.

Of course it's different. If I do 5 prank calls, that takes, say, 15 minutes.

In 15 minutes how many hoaxes can I generate with AI? Hundreds, maybe thousands?

This is like saying nukes are basically swords because they both kill people. We've always been able to kill people, who cares about nuclear weapons?