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
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.