Technology

59579 readers

6141 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

376

Netflix Doc ‘What Jennifer Did’ Uses AI Images to Create False Historical Record (www.404media.co)

submitted 7 months ago by [email protected] to c/technology

57 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] rdyoung 8 points 7 months ago (1 children)

They are different because they are clearly not real images or video. The fact that we can generate images of whatever we want that are near if not impossible to discern as fake by the naked eye, means that they shouldn't be in there at all.

[–] Flying_Hellfish 11 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Again, how is this different from an artist rendering? There's been artists creating digital media for documentaries for a long long time.

[+] gimpchrist -7 points 7 months ago (2 children)

How is a computer generated image different from an artist rendering? Well for one an artist is a human being.. AI is machines. No human on earth can render as well as a machine can. If you want to use machine rendering, make sure your audience is completely aware that it is AI generated, otherwise, it's not a documentary.... it's an art film.

[–] Flying_Hellfish 8 points 7 months ago

Documentaries have had drawings, with a disclaimer that it is an artist rendering, for as long as I can remember. Or what about when they hire actors to do a “dramatization” of what happened, how is this different?

The quote above is in my first post in this thread. And to say a human can't render as well as a machine, is arguable, but that isn't what this is about.

So again, if people are told that it's a rendering, regardless of who or what rendered it, what is the issue, and should all past documentaries with human renderings/reenactments not be called documentaries?

[–] cm0002 5 points 7 months ago

That's what he's saying, with proper disclosure, there's really no difference so if one (with proper disclosure) is banned then the other (Also with proper disclosure) should be as well because (assuming proper disclosure) they're both recreations of a historical event that has no actual photo or video of said event.