Claude definitely has its impressive moments where it calls out something inaccurate.
It’s also way less sycophantic, mature and better for light coding.
My only issue is that the servers are sometimes slow and so is the ios app which frequently trows an error after 2 minutes if waiting.
I’ve wondered about this.
I cant believe that somehow everything except lemmy got infected. There must exist some ai comments here but i have not noticed them…
Of course its better not do dwell on this to much or paranoia quickly sets in.
Phew, glad i dodged that bullet by buying an iphone. (/s)
You might have more technical knowledge about this than i do. I never considered a blockchain versus the blockchain. But your brief explanation does make sense.
But yes, the potential i saw in it is in a decentralised network of verification that no one party can control.
If i give you any video from online would you or your grandma be able to find the hash of the original footage which is not provided?
This is correct.
This is a flaw i had considered and never found a solution for. Hence the idea is unfinished.
The only further argument i have is that manipulating camera techniques is as old as film yet it’s the digital tools that are causing the most harm and allow any troll to partake. Staging a scene takes at least some dedication and effort.
If such would be considered on the blockchain than it would also bring in questions all other footage by the same recorder device. “Wallets” from established authors, anonymous or not would have their own reputations of trustworthyness.
Not at all. I consider journalists the best potential of early adapter.
As a consumer i don't care if i have to copy or screenshot or need to list sources if i am Just sharing to friends.
Publishers however have a responsibility towards the public to provide fair information. And if i post publicly i also try to pay a bit more attention. (Ignoring i failed exactly that just earlier today)
There would be nothing stopping anyone to ignore the system and keep sharing unverified pixels but its a real flex be able to provide open and transparent information about your sources almost upfront.
If enough established organisation start doing this then the ones that don’t will stick out like they have something to hide.
The exposé is an interesting example I had not yet considered but again i think nothing is stopping publishers from publicly stating they cannot provide sources but have the means to get it independently verified.
I also believe its possible for a camera/recorded to exist anonymously on the blockchain, just like you don't know the owner of a crypto wallet.
It would but it would be much easier to find/link and compare with the actual original.
Of course i have mentioned this was never a complete finished idea, just some thoughts i had for years.
Nowadays i can conceptualise ai tools that detect near duplicates but those obviously were not a thing when i first came up with this.
I would hope that it would be considered very damning if an official publishers referred to false footage while having all the tools to find and refer to the original. So would it Be damning for the uploader and all footage recorded with their device.
The fuck.
Basically this entire article is a lie, the author framed it as pictures from their own trip even.
One would assume that journalism would be more then motivated to proof authenticity of the images they show.
Of course such assumptions fail to consider the events at cern that fucked up any chance of reasonable reality.
Fuck, now i feel bad. Really Cant trust the internet these days.
I changed it up and included the one picture i could find that appears authentic but because that picture of mumbai was actually labeled dubai i really dont know anymore.
Thanks for pointing it out.
I also found this one but its the same source as the mislabelled mumbai picture so i cant trust it.
Death internet theory, i know it well.
And yet i keep going back, exactly because i look for a way to distraction from my troubles.