hard to detect
certainly not subjective
just depends on how it’s written
i’m fucking dead you have to be taking the piss lmfao
Comment on Jack Dorsey Releases Vine Reboot Where AI Content Is Banned
Chronographs@lemmy.zip 3 days agoEvery single one of those I’d put under the second category. It’d be hard to detect but it’s certainly not subjective. It just depends on how it’s written.
jwmgregory@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 days ago
Chronographs@lemmy.zip 2 days ago
Whether AI art is good is subjective, it will change based on the whims of who you ask and cannot be defined. Whether something is AI generated depends on what definition you use but given a definition it either fits it or it doesn’t. It’s not subjective it’s just a little broad. As far as it being hard to detect that has no bearing on whether it is or isn’t AI.
jwmgregory@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 days ago
Whether something is AI generated depends on what definition you use
I am so sorry, I don’t mean to be terse, but; We must speak a different English because this is the actual fucking dictionary definition of “subjective” :
4 a(1) : peculiar to a particular individual : personal subjective judgments (2) : modified or affected by personal views, experience, or background a subjective account of the incident b : arising from conditions within the brain or sense organs and not directly caused by external stimuli subjective sensations c : arising out of or identified by means of one's perception of one's own states and processes a subjective symptom of disease compare objective sense 2c
THEREFORE, ANOTHER WAY OF SAYING:
Whether something is AI generated [or not, sic] depends on what definition you use…
MIGHT BE…
Whether something is AI generated or not is subjective.
Regardless,
Yeah I’m basically ignoring the part of implementing it as a separate issue from defining it, which is the part I’m saying is objective. Given a definition of what type of content they want to ban you should be able to figure out whether something you’re going to post is allowed or not, that’s why I’m saying it’s not subjective.
You summed up the problem with your own semantic definitions and viewpoints earlier pretty well. What you’re basically saying is there could exist a model that defines and filters AI content based on a subjective definition of genAI, which no shit sherlock - that’s fucking trivial and can be said about anything. There could exist a model that subjectively defines unicorns and filters them out of all content too. Doesn’t mean it’s actually useful to anybody or that there’s any practical reason to build it, though.
You’re just talking past @chrash0@lemmy.world who’s trying to point out to you that actually defining what constitutes genAI content is the hard part. You’re being obtuse and intentionally ignoring it by focusing on the implementation itself being easy.
Of course filtering things by a definition you’ve set is trivial. Out of all infinite possible definitions that we can choose, how do we make the right assumptions to choose the most optimal one, though? Do you see the issue and why you’re being kind of fucking stupid, man?
Chronographs@lemmy.zip 1 day ago
I don’t agree that having multiple definitions for something makes it subjective, what it makes it is vague. If you provide one one of those definitions to someone and ask them if something meets it (and for the sake of argument they have full knowledge of how it was created) they should always be able to come to the same conclusion. As I understand it, and the definitions you provided, what makes something subjective is whether it will be unique to the person evaluating it. If my definition of good art is it makes ME feel something, somebody else could look at the same thing I do and come to a different conclusion. You couldn’t build a model that filters out bad art based on that subjective definition. All I’ve been trying to say is that whether something is AI is something that is definable but apparently I’m being too fucking stupid to make that clear.
chrash0@lemmy.world 3 days ago
but what are the criteria? just because you think you have a handle on it doesn’t mean everyone else does or even shares your conclusion. and there’s no metric here i can measure, to for example block it from my platform.
Chronographs@lemmy.zip 3 days ago
The criteria is whatever you put in the “no ai” policy on the site. Whether that be ‘you can’t post videos wholly generated from a prompt’ to ‘you can’t post anything that uses any form of neural net in the production chain’ to something in between. You can specify what types are and are not included and blanket ban/allow everything else. It can definitely be defined in the user agreement, the part that’s actually hard would be detection/enforcement.
chrash0@lemmy.world 3 days ago
my point is that it’s hard to program someone’s subjective, if written in whatever form of legalese, point of view into a detection system, especially when those same detection systems can be used to great effect to train systems to bypass them. any such detection system would likely be an “AI” in the same way the ones they ban are and would be similarly prone to mistakes and to reflecting the values of the company (read: Jack Dorsey) rather than enforcing any objective ethical boundary.
Chronographs@lemmy.zip 3 days ago
Every single comment I said that detecting them would be the hard part, I’ve been talking about defining the type of content that is allowed/banned not the part where they actually have to filter it.