News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
Any way to see the video without making an X account and scrolling Musk's feed? Two things I'd rather not do.
Here’s a direct link to the tweet, but I’m not sure if you can watch the video without an account anymore: https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1816974609637417112?s=46&t=EUtgwMByNj4sQbVP9INV-Q
Oh, I actually was able to see it without an account-- Thank you for finding/sharing the link!
It's uh... Pretty much exactly what it sounded like from the article. It's pretty clear to me that it's satire and fake, but I'm not sure that it would be to, say, some of my family members.
It's worse than I thought from the article. Outrageously and overtly racist.
I’m glad it’s not easy because it shouldn’t be disseminated
Gotta hard disagree with you there, friend... Although I see the merit in that, I think we should be taking examples like this and sharing them around with crystal clear context that:
Like I know lots of people who don't know that this sort of thing is even remotely possible, and would have a hard time understanding how to contextualize it, even if they sense something fishy about it. They need to see and hear these deepfake-adjacent materials first hand with context to innoculate against the truly deceptive stuff that they'll be exposed to.
It also feels like there's something subliminal about it. Like you're hearing her voice saying she's a deep state puppet then cut to her actually making a mistake in a speech (but it's using old school editing techniques there too) and then back to the deepfake voice back to the actual video of her.
Sure when you see it you know which is her and which is the deepfake. But later if you see some of those actual clips again, you might recall seeing it somewhere before and then vaguely recall some of the things the deepfake voice said along with it.
It's very insidious really. Memories are a weird thing and I don't know if it's been studied what kind of effect this sort of thing could have on people. So I don't know. But it seems plausible that you could create false memories of someone saying something they didn't say by intercutting things they did say with a deep fake of things they didn't say.
Yeah, I think that's exactly right. I don't think it's like a sophisticated deliberate psyop or anything like that, but the effect you describe certainly exists.
Most people are only partially paying attention to most of the information they consume, even the smart, thoughtful ones... Combined with the lossy storage of human memory, it's easy to cache the wrong conclusions when exposed to stuff like this.
By 30s in to the 1m52s video, when she calls Biden a deep state puppet, is where it’ll be obvious to (I hope) 99% of the population. Prob not quite that high though. But yeah. Wanna emphasize it’s not a deepfake of her supposedly spicy stuff…
It’s what an idiot thinks is cunning satire.
It’s dangerous, of course, but don’t want folks to get the wrong message. We might be at an early stage of Musk testing what he can get away with w/r/t political deepfakes - maybe the next one will be dicier. Or maybe not, he can be awful without faking a thing.
Yeah... I think part of the trouble though is that even if people recognize that calling Biden "a deep state puppet" is not plausible, many people don't know that it's possible to realistically synthesize a voice like that, so where do they end up?
"Well they probably took some other quote she said out of context, she must have been joking when she said that," or "They must have cut different clips together" or something like that.
So even people who don't fully fall for it can still be deceived in a more subtle way. Or as another respondent mentions, over time, you remember her voice saying something dubious, but don't quite remember where or what. A subtle nudge that can be just as dangerous as buying it at face value.
Indeed, 99% was fabulously wishful of me.
Devious and insidious. Great point.
Yeah like... Maybe 99% (or some high number) would sense that something's up, but end up with the wrong conclusion. Like how an older family member of mine thought James Cameron's Avatar had really impressive makeup and costumes and other practical effects... cause he didn't really understand CGI.
Where he should have landed was something like "My model of how practical effects work can't adequately explain this," but instead, his brain made some smaller-but-more-wrong leaps that led him somewhere weird.
I think lots of people are going to experience that same kind of thing with AI-driven propaganda, even when they notice that something is up.
I really do see your point but like deplatforming my instinct is “out of sight out of mind.”
I see your point, too! I think to the degree that the story is about Elon showing us who he is, it makes sense to just give the dumpster fire less oxygen to burn… But to the degree that it's about AI eroding our ability to understand truth, I think we need as much exposure as possible to things like this while we can recognize them.
I think a reasonable person could land in either place in this instance.
Fair enough