Ive seen it elsewhere and it was just normal questions related to some sociology homework about different types of concentration.

This guy markets.

How do i somehow fit all three of these?

Sure i’ll have a look at decentralized certificate authorities options.

Very possibles to adapt my idea to whatever technology provides those function honestly.

The only actual connection i have with blockchain is that reading about it when it was new directly inspired in me a possible way to combat fake news.

That hardware inputs can be faked is part of my reasoning here because there would be transparency of the source of footage.

If a reputable journalists fake their own footage and it would be found out their credibility would be gone.

If they often rely on borrowing footage and don’t fact check it. Credibility will degrade as well.

Journalist media that does their work and only uses credible sources will thrive.

My solution isn’t about who or how signature gets created but how ordinary people can check for themselves where a clip within footage originates from.

I am fine with inventing a new system that does this and call it something else than blockchain. But my understanding is that it does pretty much provide this functionality in a robust manner.

Also typing these comments on the go caused me to lose something dear to me on public transport. I am very sad now and probably wont engage further.

I am not sure what you think blockchain actually is but in essence its a decentralized ledger of signatures.

Not coins, no sellable goods. Just that. Computers connected in a network to verify the correctness of a cloud ledger.

So if you say signing footage is one thing how do you propose a laymen can verify that signature without centralized databank.

I understand some people may not mind centralized authority but i prefer against it.

I am willing to hear peoples thoughts on this. I am not pro or against blockchain or any form of technology. With the information i have this just seems like a reasonable and practical solution.

For the longest time now, from before AI, before NFT was a thing i had an idea to incorporating blockchain tech into real life media footage to combat the rise of misinformation.

The metadata, original author would be stored on this chain the moment footage is recorded. The biggest challenge is that this means the devices themselves need to be connected.

Adoption would be slow but i imagined news and official channels make use of this tech first. Eventually all footage outside of this will be seen as not trustworthy

Then NFTBros came along and people have shit on this idea ever since. Some days i feel that was a conspiracy to ruim out perception of potential but more likely humans where just greedy.

I still believe this could work. Detailed example below:

The system works with a fair amount of transparency, verifiable digital signatures for recording devices and their owners. Professional cameras and organizations would have publicly known IDs, while individuals could choose to remain pseudonymous authors but would need to build credibility over time.

Let’s say BBC records an interview. When viewers watch this content on any platform, they can access blockchain verification through an embedded interface (perhaps a small icon in the corner). This shows the complete chain of custody from recording to broadcast.

The system verifies content through computational comparisons. When a raw interview is edited into a final piece:

• Each original clip has a unique blockchain signature
• The final edited version’s signature can be compared against source material
• Automated analysis shows what percentage of original footage matches
• Modifications like color correction or audio adjustments are detected through signature differences
• Additional elements like station logos or intro sequences have their own verified identifiers

I am less concerned with stopping young people from accessing the web then with general awareness of people about the damaging mental side effects of technology.

Those side effects are usually long term, an account and a few online interactions wont harm much. But a habit will.

If my kids hacks trough my infrastructure i will shine with IT pride… and then update my infrastructure explaining them why it is i am so concerned.

I know they will find ways outside my walled garden but keeping them in was never the point, providing a safe space to live to develop healthy habits is.

By starvation.

I am not even kidding, see indie game the movie.

Games are art and making art in this works comes with the sacrifice of not being able to afford anything until you by chance become popular.

I agree i should have used different words, scam-ableism is counter productive to educate about traps.

I am pretty sure my dad fell for one of these because an ad popt up trying to pay a digital parking meter.

Though he wasn’t trying to get access to illegal content what people behind this campaign are alluding towards.

Scams come in so many shapes and forms, there is accidental click and there is “looked like an official Netflix page”. How many people will knowingly pay for something they know is available for free?

I went to their website just to have a laugh. This is some real shizo propaganda.

You could replace all of it with: Only watch self sourced pirated media! Paying and relying on any service has inherent risks

“1 in 3 (32%) people who illegally stream in the UK say they, or someone they know, have been a victim of fraud, scams, or identity theft as a result.”

320/1000 people know someone unlucky enough to fall for a scam.

This risk increases significantly when users exchange credit or debit card information to view content on unregulated and illicit websites.

If you pay for your pirated content you are doing it wrong.

Watching content via an illicit source can expose younger viewers to age-inappropriate content. These unauthorised websites, devices, apps, add-ons, and the content they can access have no parental controls.

My kids get a tablet exclusively pointing to a private media server in order to obtain the parental controls for-profit services just don’t provide. I banned YouTube kids, it was a shitfest.

Of topic but that is one hell of a dogfart in the picture.

Ive had similar ideas on verified unaltered media to combat fake news. Such an archive but for journalism would be a great start.

After years of knowing about star trek but never really sitting through it i am watching voyager for the first time.

Currently somewhere at the end of season 2

I actually really loved S2E3 projections, it may even be my premature favorite.

I don’t mind a it was all a dream scenario if its there to explore something or a character and i really feel i got to learn the doctor much better from it.

Now there was this other episode (treshold?) where they evolved into fucking lizards. (Not even cursing) and 5 minutes later everything was normal and that one still doesn’t sit right.

A single AGI would not be to different from a human. But it may not take long for AGI to develop ASI, superior to human intelligence.

Thats not an astronaut impact but alien contact

Ops focus on a singular “nicely packaged “ egg made me unable to consider anything else then bird eggs.

I was so confused by your comment, i had to look it up.

First, did you read even the research papers?

Secondly, none are out that are actually immune to jailbreaking lol, Where did that claim come from?

Gpt4 is just an llm. Indeed the better version of gpt3

Gpt4o and 1o (claude-sonnet possibly also) rely on the generative capacities of the gpt4 model but there is allot more going under the hood that is not simply “generate the next token”

We all agree that a pure text predictor are not at all intelligent.

The discussion at hand is wether the current frontier of ai has moved the needle up. And i still would call it pretty dumb, but moving that needle, it did. Somewhere around (x2y0.5) if i have to use the meme. Stating its (0,0) just means people aren’t interested enough to pay attention, that these aren’t just llm anymore. That’s their right but i prefer people stopped joining the discussion so uninformed.

Now that is fair.

How is good old fashioned code comparing outputs to a database of factual knowledge “predicting the next token” to you. Or reinforcement relearning and token rewards baked into models.

I can tell you have not actually tried to work with professional ai or looked at the research papers.

Yes none of it is “intelligent” but i would counter that with neither are human beings, we dont even know how to define intelligence.

This is true if you describe a pure llm, like gpt3

However systems like claude, gpt4o and 1o are far from just a single llm, they are a blend of tailored llms, machine learning some old fashioned code to weave it all together.

Op does ask “modern llm” so technically you are right but i believed they did mean the more advanced “products”

Though i would not be able to actually answer ops questions, ai is hard to directly compare with a human.

In most ways its embarrassingly stupid, in other it has already surpassed us.