DEEP FAKES

[RollingJ]

14 minutes ago, crookesey said:

The heading of this topic is DEEP FAKE, what would you wish it to be called? 

I agree that is the topic heading, but I was responding to @Anna Bin the post you quote. As I rarely watch TV, and am suspicious as to the veracity of much that is reported anyway, as far as I'm concerned you can leave as the 'news inspired' heading.

[Anna B]

48 minutes ago, RollingJ said:

I agree that is the topic heading, but I was responding to @Anna Bin the post you quote. As I rarely watch TV, and am suspicious as to the veracity of much that is reported anyway, as far as I'm concerned you can leave as the 'news inspired' heading.

... And there's the problem. 

You're out of touch but won't do anything to stay in touch.  but still feel qualified to spout your views on things you know nothing about

[RollingJ]

1 minute ago, Anna B said:

... And there's the problem. 

You're out of touch but won't do anything to stay in touch.  but still feel qualified to spout your views on things you know nothing about

The fact that the media reports as they see fit means that what you see or hear may not be the truth - I stay in touch with a variety of things, but not always via the 'mass media' as it called these days.

[Anna B]

8 minutes ago, RollingJ said:

The fact that the media reports as they see fit means that what you see or hear may not be the truth - I stay in touch with a variety of things, but not always via the 'mass media' as it called these days.

 

I agree that main stream media doesn't always report fairly, accurately or lies by ommision, which is why it's necessary to check a number of other sources for validation. This takes time and effort which not everybody can be bothered with - that is their choice, but they can hardly be described as informed. Likewise, the echo chamber effect has ensured that people who don't deliberately search for opposing views become more entrenched in their opinions.   

 

To not know what AI is, or is capable of, and where it is leading us, is a dangerous oversight. We are heading into unprecedented new teritory with no blue print so we are beholden to find out as much as we can for ourselves. 

It is progressing exponentially at an incredible rate, and not waiting for us to catch up with it. That means it is a currently unregulated and very clever entity which can, and is, leading us unwittingly into all sorts of  practical, philosophical, and existential problems.

 

No one can foretell the future, but we can make some very educated guesses by extrapolating what we know and applying it to AI. It learns, can reproduce, and soon will be able to write the programs it needs for itself, with very little human input which may well be a very dangerous situation. (That's not my opinion, but that of far more learned scientists than me..)

Unfortunately by that time it will be too late, it will have become a gigantic superpower in its own right.

 

Again not my opinion but that of scientists who know about these things.

[RollingJ]

Interesting discourse, but doesn't really address the post you quoted, and, with respect, also appears to suggest you believe things which support your view of the world. Your privilege, but equally worrying - IMO.