This is the problem with AI, and it's only going to get worse (Page 2): See my post to srt101fan.

Curmudgeon Loc: SE Arizona

NickGee wrote:

Agreed. Utter distrust and generalized paranoia not warranted. It really only takes consulting a handful of sources to suss out the veracity of the message. Less so for the image, of course, except the ridiculous ones like those that you see on the Hog.

See my post to srt101fan.

srt101fan

Curmudgeon wrote:

Only if you have a source that is "true". How do you determine true? By how closely it agrees with your beliefs.

Don't insult me. No, my beliefs have nothing to do with my pursuit of the truth.

Curmudgeon Loc: SE Arizona

srt101fan wrote:

Don't insult me. No, my beliefs have nothing to do with my pursuit of the truth.

I apologize certainly no insult was intended. I would like to discuss this subject further. My wife has almost exactly the same views you do on this subject, and we haven't been able to change each other for 51 years.

srt101fan

Curmudgeon wrote:

I apologize certainly no insult was intended. I would like to discuss this subject further. My wife has almost exactly the same views you do on this subject, and we haven't been able to change each other for 51 years.

Sorry, poor choice of words; i didn't really feel insulted, just frustrated. 😟

I just think you need to have an interest in exploring opposing views rather than only those that reinforce your beliefs. I have to be careful not to get into pol*****l talk here, but I maintain you cannot be a well informed citizen unless you get your news from sources on both sides of an issue.

NickGee Loc: Pacific Northwest

Curmudgeon wrote:

Only if you have a source that is "true". How do you determine true? By how closely it agrees with your beliefs.

No. By consulting multiple sources and then using your head.

NickGee Loc: Pacific Northwest

NickGee wrote:

No. By consulting multiple sources and then using your head.

For example, the NY Times is reporting that Israel and Hamas have agreed to a cease fire to begin on Friday. Fox is reporting the same. As are multiple other sources. I'm confident that this report is accurate.

It's not that difficult.

Curmudgeon Loc: SE Arizona

NickGee wrote:

For example, the NY Times is reporting that Israel and Hamas have agreed to a cease fire to begin on Friday. Fox is reporting the same. As are multiple other sources. I'm confident that this report is accurate.

It's not that difficult.

The truth is in the details not the headlines

Breitbart News reported that the exchange may be delayed because Hamas is unable to locate 50 hostages. According to this source Hamas has "farmed out" some of the hostages to "other organizations"

NickGee Loc: Pacific Northwest

Curmudgeon wrote:

The truth is in the details not the headlines

Breitbart News reported that the exchange may be delayed because Hamas is unable to locate 50 hostages. According to this source Hamas has "farmed out" some of the hostages to "other organizations"

But you said earlier "No way to tell fact from fiction in writing." Unless from Breitbart, is that it? Or Newsmax? From outlets that tend to tell you what you like to hear? I get it. (And to the Attic we go.)

Curmudgeon Loc: SE Arizona

NickGee wrote:

But you said earlier "No way to tell fact from fiction in writing." Unless from Breitbart, is that it? Or Newsmax? From outlets that tend to tell you what you like to hear? I get it. (And to the Attic we go.)

I agree. No way to tell, I just provided an alternative source

JBRIII

I don't think this has been covered here, but one likely consequence of A.I. is that eventually it may produce nothing of interest, use or value. The reasoning is that the basis for all of it is data garnered from the web. You provide a text and it produces an image based on it's connections of words and images, all from the web in many case. The problem is that the generated data (images) will become part of the data base in the future. Eventually, real images may well be dominated by the A.I. created. At that point, fantasy will be generating fantasy.

I'm not sure there is any answer as if you think about it, even humans are subject to such things. People learn whatever language they exposed to as children, no single reality there. My wife learned somewhere that native Americans can or could see patterns that others don't from their existence in their environment. I'm pretty sure that experiments have shown that animals can be brought up to see only vertical or horizontal lines by such exposures while young. So, even our reality is based on the data we get!

gvarner Loc: Central Oregon Coast

I contend that automatic sky replacement makes for a fake photo. Others can argue that anything but SOOC is fake.

BebuLamar

Yes it's getting worse. I have to pay to read the article.

riderxlx Loc: DFW area Texas

NickGee wrote:

Try this one

https://wapo.st/3SXKqHh

This one works only for That one article any of the other topics on the page the subscription pops up.
I do not want to join the Washington compost because they’re biased and slanted politically.
Bruce

srt101fan

riderxlx wrote:

This one works only for That one article any of the other topics on the page the subscription pops up.
I do not want to join the Washington compost because they’re biased and slanted politically.
Bruce

That "compost" reference is so old, childish and dumb. Thanks for starting the climb into The Attic.

riderxlx Loc: DFW area Texas

srt101fan wrote:

That "compost" reference is so old, childish and dumb. Thanks for starting the climb into The Attic.

Do you have a better description, Mr. smart ass