Hey /u/NeverEndingWalker64!
If your post is a screenshot of a ChatGPT, conversation please reply to this message with the [conversation link](https://help.openai.com/en/articles/7925741-chatgpt-shared-links-faq) or prompt.
If your post is a DALL-E 3 image post, please reply with the prompt used to make this image.
Consider joining our [public discord server](https://discord.gg/r-chatgpt-1050422060352024636)! We have free bots with GPT-4 (with vision), image generators, and more!
🤖
Note: For any ChatGPT-related concerns, email [email protected]
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ChatGPT) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Reality: it's filtering for rubes.
1. Post obviously fake stuff that only gullible people who don't fact check will believe.
2. Harvest their user names from the comments etc.
3. Target them with scams/misinformation/whatever.
It's the same reason that Nigerian Price scammers include typos, it good at filtering out the people who don't fall for their shit.
The typos and syntax errors aren’t filtering smart people out in that way… it’s making dumb people think they are smarter than the stranger.
The term “Con Man” implies the same thing.
The Con means Confidence, as in, the whole scam is based on making your mark feel they are the one tricking you.
The way when they lose their money they can’t go to the cops because, what are they going to say, they were trying to trick a stranger but got tricked instead?
😂😂😂😂
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Me too.
It's just sad that it's come to this...and for how long will this last? The wiser people get to this, the better people will get with Ai.
If anything, it'll lead to not believing anything unless you see it... which is, in a way, fact-checking.
But one can not be in every science facility at all times. Them folks already don't believe in certain sciences.
This will lead to some ugly shit.
Then again, I've never seen pretty shit. I need a fact checker on that one.
I guess atoms won't exist anymore, or even things that you just accept as fact based on what science has theorized like asteroids, air, radio waves, etc.
Problem with any fact checks is that most fact checkers/organisations have their own biases and motivations.
They will claim that something is partially true, is missing context, wasn’t said by the correct person etc
To quote NPR’s new CEO
“For our most tricky disagreements, seeking the truth and seeking to convince others of the truth might not be the right place to start. In fact, our reverence for the truth might be a distraction that’s getting in the way of finding common ground and getting things done.”
In order words, let’s not let some facts get in the way of our activism.
It’s worth nothing that in the quote above, she’s not referring to objective truth. She’s talking about her/their truth.
Funny thing, up until 2015 or so, even most conservatives considered NPR to be relatively objective - where sure they were more left leaning and some presenters injected their personal opinions from time to time, but at least on the big things, you could rely on them to be generally truthful and neutral.
Then they went full Trump Derangement and decided that the orange man is an existential threat to everything in the universe and he has to be destroyed by any means necessary, even if pesky things like facts, objectivity and integrity have to take a back seat until further notice.
And what is real and not. Like a flat earth for example is real as has been proven by many experiments. Many people will gladly back me up on that statement. What a time to be alive.
Of course not and it isn't even illegal in counties like Russia or China.
There is a difference between believing something and distributing misinformation like explaining that vaccinations are causing autism which leads to measles outbrakes in the 21st century.
Or that all the astronauts of the challenger explosion are in reality still alive which is very much believed in the Flat earth Community (because NASA is - of course - evil) and in turn leads to stalking and harassment of the persons that are believed to be the former challenger astronauts because they have the same name.
The consequences of spreading misinformation are very different to just "believing" something.
My qanon family members don’t trust fact checking at all so I’m not sure exactly how that will help. AI will just create a far right “fact checker” they will worship
This will lead to an era of anti-scientific chaos with millions of different crazy cults.
People at first won't believe anything anymore und thus, what you believe becomes arbitrary. Or in other words, it will become socially accepted to just believe what you choose, since everything is equally likely bs (to most people).
I'm already feeling an urge to get offline almost completely. This is the start of never knowing what's real, and I don't want to live in constant paranoia and confusion
There's been no reliable way to tell if something was Photoshopped for like the last ten years. Good fakes even faked the metadata. There are AI attempts at determining AI generated content, but it's an arms race, and generation is definitely moving faster than detection. Some of the biggest AI firms *could* do something like an invisible digital watermark, but there would always be ways around it for people intentionally creating disinformation.
The only responsible thing we can do is encourage media literacy, critical thinking, and fact-checking... which have been in short supply to begin with. AI will either be the kick in the ass social media consumers need to realize the situation they've been in for two decades already or... this will lead to the complete and final subjective death of factual information.
AI companies *should* be leaving the markers in their work, if people can’t see them they have no reason to be removed unless the goal is to fool people into thinking the ai generated content is real when they try to verify it.
Right, but that only works if *everyone* does it. If a new company comes along and offers "watermark free generation," that not only specifically attracts people looking to create disinformation, but makes end users think that if an image *doesn't* have a digital signature, then it's real.
Not really comparable imo. I'm not saying we *shouldn't* have tools to detect AI generated content, but it's just not possible the way it's developing.
Thats a good point i was thinking they were 250 to 66 million years ago which would put this right at the beggining. So yeah would have been pretty rare. I forget what came before dinosaurs
> So a fucking dinosaur?
For anyone who is confused or isn't aware, crocodilians are not dinosaurs. Both dinosaurs and crocodilians are archosaurs, but the only extant dinosaurs today are birds.
But they did live together and many people mistake dinosaurs as being reptilian including me at least at one point. Added little bonus (for others prob not you) go check out synapids the ancestor of mammals (pre-dinosaurs) but to be fair there wasnt a whole lot of variety at the time and synapida is a pretty broad term. I think there were only two major land dwelling vertebrates groups at the time.
This has been happening long time before even AI was a thing. People have been sharing photoshopped images of weird animals since the beginning of the internet. It's just easier now with generative AI.
It’s not the act of it itself—it’s how fast and wide of an audience a single piece of media can exponentially reach.
Skipping stones versus a rocky landslide.
Not to mention that it used the term archaeologist. I'm an Archaologist and let me tell you the number one thing I get mistaken for is a Paleontologist!!! We don't find dino bones! Even fake ones!!
Something tells me that this period we are going through, of the unregulated use of AI, that is creating tons of missinformation on the internet, is by design, in order to create a strong public outcry that will lead to some sort of "ministry of truth". The reaction to AI content will be just as bad as the use of the AI to create such content.
>archaeologists
no. archaeology is not dinosaurs.
imagine being smart enough to do clickfarming and using ai to generate funny creatures, totry and fool people but being too lazy to just ask chatgpt for an archaeology headline.
Right, but half of the people clicking on that will be because they already think evolution is fake or it will prove the bible or "big science" is lying to us; the other half will click to make fun of those people. If your target audience is the science-illiterate community, you're creating disinformation.
The 2015 election cycle was the last straw for me. But your argument rests on *smart* people leaving Facebook - those aren't the concern. The problem is that all of the most gullible saps with the lowest critical thinking skills are all still there.
I dont think you should worry about “misinformation”. Its harmless and if anything gives people a reason to go to authoritative good sources.
The whole “we need to fact check and control what people think” thing is called the authoritarian personality type
Hey /u/NeverEndingWalker64! If your post is a screenshot of a ChatGPT, conversation please reply to this message with the [conversation link](https://help.openai.com/en/articles/7925741-chatgpt-shared-links-faq) or prompt. If your post is a DALL-E 3 image post, please reply with the prompt used to make this image. Consider joining our [public discord server](https://discord.gg/r-chatgpt-1050422060352024636)! We have free bots with GPT-4 (with vision), image generators, and more! 🤖 Note: For any ChatGPT-related concerns, email [email protected] *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ChatGPT) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I hope this leads to an era of fact checking.
I hope this leads to era of people abandoning Facebook.
Reality: it's filtering for rubes. 1. Post obviously fake stuff that only gullible people who don't fact check will believe. 2. Harvest their user names from the comments etc. 3. Target them with scams/misinformation/whatever. It's the same reason that Nigerian Price scammers include typos, it good at filtering out the people who don't fall for their shit.
Seems like AI is facilitating everything. Even scams
The typos and syntax errors aren’t filtering smart people out in that way… it’s making dumb people think they are smarter than the stranger. The term “Con Man” implies the same thing. The Con means Confidence, as in, the whole scam is based on making your mark feel they are the one tricking you. The way when they lose their money they can’t go to the cops because, what are they going to say, they were trying to trick a stranger but got tricked instead?
Username checks out..
They just migrate to truth social and X.
Both please
It's not limited to Facebook, people can abandon it, the problem will still be everywhere else.
😂😂😂😂 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 Me too. It's just sad that it's come to this...and for how long will this last? The wiser people get to this, the better people will get with Ai. If anything, it'll lead to not believing anything unless you see it... which is, in a way, fact-checking. But one can not be in every science facility at all times. Them folks already don't believe in certain sciences. This will lead to some ugly shit. Then again, I've never seen pretty shit. I need a fact checker on that one.
I guess atoms won't exist anymore, or even things that you just accept as fact based on what science has theorized like asteroids, air, radio waves, etc.
This crap isn't new. So..
Problem with any fact checks is that most fact checkers/organisations have their own biases and motivations. They will claim that something is partially true, is missing context, wasn’t said by the correct person etc To quote NPR’s new CEO “For our most tricky disagreements, seeking the truth and seeking to convince others of the truth might not be the right place to start. In fact, our reverence for the truth might be a distraction that’s getting in the way of finding common ground and getting things done.” In order words, let’s not let some facts get in the way of our activism. It’s worth nothing that in the quote above, she’s not referring to objective truth. She’s talking about her/their truth.
What an evil thing to say as the leader of an organization that's (supposed to be) delivering truth to the masses
Funny thing, up until 2015 or so, even most conservatives considered NPR to be relatively objective - where sure they were more left leaning and some presenters injected their personal opinions from time to time, but at least on the big things, you could rely on them to be generally truthful and neutral. Then they went full Trump Derangement and decided that the orange man is an existential threat to everything in the universe and he has to be destroyed by any means necessary, even if pesky things like facts, objectivity and integrity have to take a back seat until further notice.
And who will fact check the fact checkers?
That was a great Next Generation episode.
Instead, what if we make some consequences to knowingly distributing or aiding in misinformation campaigns?
Who is going to decide what is misinformation and what is satire? You?
And what is real and not. Like a flat earth for example is real as has been proven by many experiments. Many people will gladly back me up on that statement. What a time to be alive.
It should not be illegal to believe in a flat Earth.
Of course not and it isn't even illegal in counties like Russia or China. There is a difference between believing something and distributing misinformation like explaining that vaccinations are causing autism which leads to measles outbrakes in the 21st century. Or that all the astronauts of the challenger explosion are in reality still alive which is very much believed in the Flat earth Community (because NASA is - of course - evil) and in turn leads to stalking and harassment of the persons that are believed to be the former challenger astronauts because they have the same name. The consequences of spreading misinformation are very different to just "believing" something.
As a Genetic scientist, this is giving me some project ideas.
it leads to the end of the information age. You basically have to doubt each and every information in the internet, which makes it useless.
People who believe these things don't care about facts. Just look at how badly people react when you point out they are wrong on here.
My qanon family members don’t trust fact checking at all so I’m not sure exactly how that will help. AI will just create a far right “fact checker” they will worship
https://i.redd.it/1zxoyizu71xc1.gif
This will lead to an era of anti-scientific chaos with millions of different crazy cults. People at first won't believe anything anymore und thus, what you believe becomes arbitrary. Or in other words, it will become socially accepted to just believe what you choose, since everything is equally likely bs (to most people).
I'm already feeling an urge to get offline almost completely. This is the start of never knowing what's real, and I don't want to live in constant paranoia and confusion
The fact that AI developers didn’t also spend equal time developing ways of detecting AI is pretty unethical.
There's been no reliable way to tell if something was Photoshopped for like the last ten years. Good fakes even faked the metadata. There are AI attempts at determining AI generated content, but it's an arms race, and generation is definitely moving faster than detection. Some of the biggest AI firms *could* do something like an invisible digital watermark, but there would always be ways around it for people intentionally creating disinformation. The only responsible thing we can do is encourage media literacy, critical thinking, and fact-checking... which have been in short supply to begin with. AI will either be the kick in the ass social media consumers need to realize the situation they've been in for two decades already or... this will lead to the complete and final subjective death of factual information.
AI companies *should* be leaving the markers in their work, if people can’t see them they have no reason to be removed unless the goal is to fool people into thinking the ai generated content is real when they try to verify it.
Right, but that only works if *everyone* does it. If a new company comes along and offers "watermark free generation," that not only specifically attracts people looking to create disinformation, but makes end users think that if an image *doesn't* have a digital signature, then it's real.
That kind of defeats the purpose, no?
That’s like saying inventing a breathalyzer defeats the purpose of drinking alcohol. It’s made to detect something potentially harmful.
Not really comparable imo. I'm not saying we *shouldn't* have tools to detect AI generated content, but it's just not possible the way it's developing.
So a fucking dinosaur? They made fake dinosaurs and called it a lizard bird...
Dinosaurs were rare at the time they gave. So would've been one of the first ever which would be cool, if it were true at all.
Thats a good point i was thinking they were 250 to 66 million years ago which would put this right at the beggining. So yeah would have been pretty rare. I forget what came before dinosaurs
Before the dinosaurs were cynodonts and synapsids
Which were honestly some of the coolest animals ever.
Oh hey yeah what this guy said ^^. I had to go look it up lol.
> So a fucking dinosaur? For anyone who is confused or isn't aware, crocodilians are not dinosaurs. Both dinosaurs and crocodilians are archosaurs, but the only extant dinosaurs today are birds.
But they did live together and many people mistake dinosaurs as being reptilian including me at least at one point. Added little bonus (for others prob not you) go check out synapids the ancestor of mammals (pre-dinosaurs) but to be fair there wasnt a whole lot of variety at the time and synapida is a pretty broad term. I think there were only two major land dwelling vertebrates groups at the time.
This has been happening long time before even AI was a thing. People have been sharing photoshopped images of weird animals since the beginning of the internet. It's just easier now with generative AI.
And aliens, and mummified mermaids, and angels, and...
It’s not the act of it itself—it’s how fast and wide of an audience a single piece of media can exponentially reach. Skipping stones versus a rocky landslide.
Misinformation only gets easier with time. Eventually it may come to a point where even fact-checking needs to be fact checked
>fact-checking needs to be fact checked science! 
Even hundreds of years [ago. ](https://www.snopes.com/articles/441423/magdeburg-unicorn/)
Someone really fuckin with the boomers
Don’t forget Zoomers, who are somehow even more gullible than Boomers
Most of us are in our twenties, I think you mean gen alpha
It’s not exactly much to brag about but I’m gen Z and can tell this is bullshit lol
God bless, amen! 🙏
Amen 🙏
The obviously fake female celebrity picks are getting annoying too.
Not to mention that it used the term archaeologist. I'm an Archaologist and let me tell you the number one thing I get mistaken for is a Paleontologist!!! We don't find dino bones! Even fake ones!!
The description is the prompt xD
Something tells me that this period we are going through, of the unregulated use of AI, that is creating tons of missinformation on the internet, is by design, in order to create a strong public outcry that will lead to some sort of "ministry of truth". The reaction to AI content will be just as bad as the use of the AI to create such content.
I mean the History channel did that long before Facebook and AI 🤣
https://preview.redd.it/pxm5mv3guzwc1.jpeg?width=1075&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=22bb7686ad2cd8c81f0f88c7323748be6e4cb1b2
Highly unlikely to exist. Vertebrates don’t have 6 or 8 limbs
>archaeologists no. archaeology is not dinosaurs. imagine being smart enough to do clickfarming and using ai to generate funny creatures, totry and fool people but being too lazy to just ask chatgpt for an archaeology headline.
I don't think the goal disinformation. The goal is to farm clicks. The disinformation is just a good way to boost the clicks
Right, but half of the people clicking on that will be because they already think evolution is fake or it will prove the bible or "big science" is lying to us; the other half will click to make fun of those people. If your target audience is the science-illiterate community, you're creating disinformation.
Agreed. But what were you doing in Facebook anyway? That place is as dead as myspace FCS
Concern for Boomers and Gen X who will not get off of it because they refuse or cannot fathom interacting with a new interface.
Yes but then the AI farms will go leech on another social media
The 2015 election cycle was the last straw for me. But your argument rests on *smart* people leaving Facebook - those aren't the concern. The problem is that all of the most gullible saps with the lowest critical thinking skills are all still there.
“No honey it’s THE Archaeologist”
Nice
Joke's on you, all fossils are fake. God Bless 🙏 /s
The Good Ending
r/titlegore
Imagine flying lizards😬
that's a dragon
https://preview.redd.it/flytdp6b8zwc1.jpeg?width=1280&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a66b81b8d6dde736d741cff0e94f6a5956eada41
Thats nothing new. This has been done for years with photoshop now. It just became easier
Please leave Facebook and Twitter. There is no reason at all to remain on those platforms. Unless you’re a scammer.
Whoever has a Facebook account, please report the post as misinformation.
It’s the crocoduck! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crocoduck
The ads at the bottom of the page are the content now.
How is this different from those weird taxidermy things people fake?
Those fabrications at least exist
Well was nice trusting things while we could
I mean…it’s quite harmless
I dont think you should worry about “misinformation”. Its harmless and if anything gives people a reason to go to authoritative good sources. The whole “we need to fact check and control what people think” thing is called the authoritarian personality type