Homestucks ❤ Socialism

'hey we've been spying on you and tracking your every move. it's a culmination of state of the art technology and an unprecedented invasion of consumer privacy. a room full of men with made up jobs bent their will toward decades of constructing this system, defending it in court, and tirelessly innovating new ways to aggregate more data about you'

and the end result is

'yeah so uh we saw that you recently bought a car. so here's an ad for that car'

Four women have accused Oscar-winning actor and Thirty Seconds to Mars frontman Jared Leto of criminal sexual conduct, with the alleged offences having taken place when they were teenagers.

In total, 10 women have spoken to the BBC documentary - Jared Leto: Hollywood's Dark Secret - with nine of them sharing their stories publicly for the first time.

All the women say they encountered Leto between 2002 and 2016, when he was in his 30s and 40s. He is now 54.

"This was 25 years ago… he has gotten away with it," says one of his alleged victims.

homestuck but its set in 2025 instead of 2009

I keep seeing people use free AI detection websites as evidence in AI witch hunts.

These websites are often scams. They use AI to detect AI. They rarely disclose their methods. They are typically only reliable on obvious material and are no better than a coin flip on content that is more challenging (which is usually when AI detection is needed most).

You'll even note that these websites do not give you a strict yes or no. They give you a percentage of confidence. Yes, it is true that human forensic analysis often has a confidence rating instead of an absolute certainty. But in this case, this gives these websites cover for when they create false positives. They don't tell you their actual success rate of detecting AI, so if you get a bad result, they can just say the tool was only 80% confident.

Even laboratory-grade forensic tools struggle to get above 70-80% accuracy, and staying ahead of AI improvements to maintain that accuracy is a constant struggle.

The best forensic analysis of AI media always has a human component. They use detection software in combination with human experts. There is no reliable, fully automated process. Especially now that people are combining AI with traditional techniques. They might generate an AI image and then use Photoshop to add noise, resize it, change the color and contrast. 5 minutes of work can remove the classic signs of AI that many of these detectors look for.

If you are suspicious of something and you want to use one of these tools as an initial indicator that you should seek out more evidence, I feel that is their only real use case. Like, it should be step one of a multistep process of investigation and it should not be your only evidence. In fact, you should not include it as evidence when making an accusation.

Look for creation dates. Look for provenance. Look at the artist's other work. Look for process videos.

But if you use the result of an AI detector to confidently say something is AI, you could very well hurt an artist using a dubious tool that consistently spits out false positives.

I'm feeling a bit psychic now.

I'm guessing Google has one of the most advanced AI detection tools in the world. But this process cannot be 100% automated or else it will continue to hurt artists.

Google has long refused to hire actual humans to assist their automated processes. If a small YouTube channel needs help, they can rarely reach an actual human being. You need millions of subscribers for the privilege of not dealing with some sort of bot.

they've had to face settlements against stealing from current authors, so they'll just go for the old books now. they're also doing this so they have the only copies of rare books.