Me too. And to be honest, the simple idea of a contact constantly sitting on my eyeball makes me squirm.

I’m in the process of being diagnosed as an adult, and I feel very validated as I relate to this very much.

Yikes

Reasons I’m too squeamish for contacts #407

It’s an article about funny orange man sitting in a garbage truck on a web forum. I reject the question. It’s not that deep. Go repost with an article you prefer if you’re that bothered.

It’s really not that deep

As someone who works in the field of criminal law (in Europe, and I would be shocked if it wasn’t the same in the US) - I’m not actually very worried about this. By that I don’t mean to say it’s not a problem, though.

The risk of evidence being tampered with or outright falsified is something that already exists, and we know how to deal with it. What AI will do is lower the barrier for technical knowledge needed to do it, making the practice more common.

While it’s pretty easy for most AI images to be spotted by anyone with some familiarity with them, they’re only going to get better and I don’t imagine it will take very long before they’re so good the average person can’t tell.

In my opinion this will be dealt with via two mechanisms:

• Automated analysis of all digital evidence for signatures of AI as a standard practice. Whoever can be the first person to land contracts with police departments to provide bespoke software for quick forensic AI detection is going to make a lot of money.

• A growth in demand for digital forensics experts who can provide evidence on whether something is AI generated. I wouldn’t expect them to be consulted on all cases with digital evidence, but for it to become standard practice where the defence raises a challenge about a specific piece of evidence during trial.

Other than that, I don’t think the current state of affairs when it comes to doctored evidence will particularly change. As I say, it’s not a new phenomenon, so countries already have the legal and procedural framework in place to deal with it. It just needs to be adjusted where needed to accommodate AI.

What concerns me much more than the issue you raise is the emergence of activities which are uniquely AI dependent and need legislating for. For example, how does AI generated porn of real people fit into existing legislation on sex offences? Should it be an offence? Should it be treated differently to drawing porn of someone by hand? Would this include manually created digital images without the use of AI? If it’s not decided to be illegal generally, what about when it depicts a child? Is it the generation of the image that should be regulated, or the distribution? That’s just one example. What about AI enabled fraud? That’s a whole can of worms in itself, legally speaking. These are questions that in my opinion are beyond the remit of the courts and will require direction from central governments and fresh, tailor made legislation to deal with.

Disney+

I’m learning a language as a hobby and Disney+ BY FAR is the most consistent in having dubs and subs available in a variety of languages. I haven’t actually watched anything that didn’t have it (for the language I’m learning). Whereas most things on other streaming sites don’t tend to have it at all unless it’s a foreign film and that’s the original language.

For me, it’s easily worth the money just for that

The censorship on Tiktok is crazy. The AI based comment removal is completely arbitrary - for example, I once had a comment removed for calling a public figure a walnut. Meanwhile, the comments are absolutely packed with the most vile comments. In particular, for content relating to my country there are thousands of comments openly celebrating and glorifying the deaths of migrants and some seriously explicitly racist rhetoric. It leads to people using silly workarounds to content filters that must be trivially easy to identify automatically, but aren’t, raising the question of why bother with such extreme censorship in the first place?

Good luck to em

Goodbye, sweet prince

Metal album when

Good. That’s why kids are so lazy these days. Back in my day battling demons and carrying a flask of holy water taught us a thing or two about life. I for one welcome the pro satanic portal stance of this administration.

Day-tah

But I’m from the UK. Anything else would sound bizarre with my accent

That was an interesting read. Are you aware of any cities or towns which are built in a more European style with pedestrians in mind? I’m actually considering a few jobs in the states right now but I’m quite put off by how car reliant everything is.

I’ve given an example of a potential extraneous factor. That’s not the same as a hypothetical case being used to dismiss fringe cases that we know for a fact happen.

I literally just reworded the same point but ok

The existance of cases where you can be 99.9% certain of guilt does not eliminate the existence of fringe cases. We know for a fact that people HAVE been executed despite being innocent. That’s a risk you must accept if you support capital punishment.

It’s not a false dichotomy because it IS a dichotomy. It’s a binary decision. You either legalise capital punishment and accept the risk of executing someone innocent or you don’t legalise it. That is the choice.

But this is a case of all or nothing. You either say the death penalty IS acceptable or it ISN’T. There is no in between. So highlighting a case with certainty doesn’t address the issue of cases with less certainty.