| ▲ | BugsJustFindMe 3 hours ago |
| > "But that's not the problem they're trying to solve." It is the problem that they say they're trying to solve, though. They specifically say "where the essential role of a photograph is to prove that something actually happened". It fails the reasonable person test to say that the "something" in that phrase refers to the act of taking the photo itself. Likewise in "distinguish between photographs that depict real events and...". |
|
| ▲ | reader9274 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| Yes, it is proving something actually happened, that is your monitor screen showing something you photographed. |
| |
|
| ▲ | brookst 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| So, in your view, photography has been fatally flawed since the late 1800’s, and mere mitigation of AI image gen are insufficient if they don’t also solve actors impersonating real people? |
| |
| ▲ | BugsJustFindMe 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | > So, in your view, photography has been fatally flawed since the late 1800’s Used in a capacity as evidence? Uh, yes? Duh? Do you seriously believe otherwise? Anyway, that scenario is made worse not better by Apple promising captured veracity. |
|
|
| ▲ | spiderice 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| This is so stupid. This makes it like, a thousand times harder to fake a photo than it would otherwise be. You pedants imagining a way to fake it doesn't change that. |
| |
| ▲ | BugsJustFindMe 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | > This makes it like, a thousand times harder to fake a photo than it would otherwise be. The problem with this thinking is twofold: 1) Whether it actually meaningfully increases the difficulty of a forgery remains to be seen. Despite their initial language about discerning real events, we see no details here about what scene information is used. 2) It increases the potential value of a forgery because now your forgery is attested by Apple. So it either makes it easier to defraud people or more worthwhile to put in the effort to defraud people or both. None of those outcomes are great. | | |
| ▲ | porkshoe an hour ago | parent [-] | | You worry that a technology that you have never used nor evaluated might not work in practice... Therefore because of your worry (which is based on remarkably little information), it's a bad technology? Come the fuck on. That's beyond luddite bullshit. | | |
|
|
