There is an ever growing percentage of new AI-generated videos among every set of daily uploads.
How long until more than half of uploads in a day are AI-generated?
Perhaps the difference here is the behaviour would be much more human and thus harder to detect using current fraud detection?
Plus some users might want to legitimately upload things with AI-generated content in it
Today, we’re launching SynthID Detector, a verification portal to help people identify AI-generated content. Upload a piece of content and the SynthID Detector will identify if either the entire file or just a part of it has SynthID in it.
With all our generative AI models, we aim to unleash human creativity and enable artists and creators to bring their ideas to life faster and more easily than ever before."
From the page linked in the post....
So there's different ways to detect AI generated content (videos/images atleast). (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-024-08025-4 <-- paper on synthID / watermarking and detecting it with LLMs)
What they do care about is their training set getting tainted, so I imagine they will push quite hard to have some mechanism to detect AI; it’s useful to them even if users don’t act on it.
Why not? Given enough data, it's possible to train models to differentiate - especially since humans can pick up on the difference pretty well.
> Plus some users might want to legitimately upload things with AI-generated content in it
Excluding videos from training datasets doesn't mean excluding them from Youtube.
Ah then sure. It was this part that was problematic.
If users are still allowed to upload flagged content, then false positives almost don't matter, so Youtube could just roll out some imperfect solution and it would be fine
Renewable energy is easily able to provide enough energy sustainable. Batteries can be recycled. Solar panels are glas/plastic and silicium.
Nuclear is feasable, fusion will happen in 50 years one way or the other.
Existens is what it is. If it means being able to watch cat videos, so be it. We are not watching them for nothing, we watch them for happiness.
Well that's just your opinion.
Yes we can generate electricity, but it would be nice if used it wisely.
Nonetheless, survival can't be the life goal after all the moon will drift away from earth in the future, the sun will explode and if we survive that as a species, all bonds between elements will disolve.
It also can't be about giving your dna away because your dna has very little to no impact over just a handful of generations.
And no the goal of our society has to be to have as much energy available as possible to us. So much energy, that energy doesn't matter. There is enough ways of generating energy without a real issue at all. Fusion, renewable energy directly from the sun.
There is also no inherant issue right now preventing us all having clean stable energy besides capitalsm. We have the technology, we have the resources, we have the manufacturing capacity.
To finish my comment: Its not about energy, its about entropy. You need energy to create entropy. We don't even consume the energy of the sun, we use it for entropy and dissipate it back to space after.
The remaining 10% is the solution to generating good hands, of course. And do you think YouTube has been helping anyone achieve that?
Of course the alternative is to use game engines, but it's possible that AI would generate more realistic video stream for the same money spent. Those recent AI-generated videos certainly look much more realistic than any game footage I ever saw.
It wouldn't be hard for google to poison competitor training just by throttling bandwidth.
This isn't certain. Google do not break out Youtube revenues nor costs. Hosting this amount of videos, globally, redundantly, the vast majority of which are basically never watched, cannot be cheap.
It's entirely plausible that Google's wider benefit from Youtube (such as training video generation algorithms and better behaviour tracking for better targeted ads across the internet) are enough to compensate for Youtube in particular losing money.
Google does break out Youtube revenue.
Latest 10-K: https://abc.xyz/assets/77/51/9841ad5c4fbe85b4440c47a4df8d/go...
See page 10, for youtube Ads revenue.
I mean, you could limit yourself to the most popular or most interesting 100 million, but that's still an enormous amount of data to download.
google will have access to all of these. competitors will have to do tons of network interactions with google to pull in only the first set. (which google could detect and block depending on how these competitors go about it)
If we look at the Veo 3 examples, this is not the typical youtube video, but instead they seem to recreate cgi movies, or actual movies.