https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=20898283

The main clue they were AI was the strange car traffic in the background. There was also an obviously fake Rachel Maddow video about the same subject. I have also seen a George Conway video I believe is fake.

Be careful. There is a lot of blatant disinformation out there right now.

my husband uses youtube a lot . He showed me a video and it was Kamala ,
everything she was saying was true , but are things she wouldn't say herself.

the video was weird IMO. I was thinking it was an AI and told my husband
what I thought .

The people who make and post these videos must believe that the entire population are morons because they ar so obviously fake. The things being said would be the #1 news story in the world if true. Unfortunately, while the entire population aren't morons, a significant portion are which allows these people to succeed. It really should be illegal. And YouTube or whoever else platforms such garbage need to be fined heavily for allowing such garbage on their sites.

YouTube frequently labels AI videos, but they don’t catch everything.

Any video with a well know figure in it that isn’t from that person’s own site or their employer’s should be suspect.

After that, so far, have been more careful as much as I can - checking out "About" labels and looking at lips that match the words, so many lips!1 -----------Or actually, applying good old *critical thinking* along the lines of Liberal Arts language analysis, common sense, sensing what is illogical or contradictory.

The problem is, the KIMMEL vid, besides being visually convincing, said all good things that KIMMEL would say zinging KRASNOV every which way - nothing that would work against his and our politics. Then, along the same lines, I posted an animated cartoon type video about (I forget: ) Greek or Roman history and got quadruple-blasted with an accompanying screed on the grounds that it was "AI Slop". It was just amusing and entertaining and not misleading in content.

Here's the thing: I can see that the ones using a celebrity/personality's image/voice, even while not misrepresenting what they have or might say, still can be considered to be sort of sleazy - although, why don't the personalities involved complain or sue or say-something about it? But in the case of the cartoon, the argument was that (just because) it was AI it was automatically *false" and I was told to look for real videos of history. The thing is that it was a *cartoon* rendition of true history - true, compared to two or three years of content on the Greek/Roman/Egyptian videos I have been looking at. The cartoon was amusing *AND* as legitimate in content as the non-cartoon ones.

*** I am as under-knowing about AI and as suspicious of it and fearful of the bits of horrible possibilities I've heard about as anybody. And I have resisted the bombardment from Google, Microsoft, and tons of other outlets trying to force me to sign up with their AI apps or whatever they are, while other tons of them already have me signed up without my knowing. But I am also wary of the zeal that is out there of "throwing the baby out with the bathwater" (as a DUer put it).

Decrying a cartoon solely because it was created by AI, without reference to what the content was, is like Dan QUAYLE fighting with a television character. More substantive arguments are about AI taking people's jobs, or actual malicious uses of AI in spreading disinformation (not true information).

**********************
********************** ON EDIT, about YouTube:
I've been "enrolled at The University of YouTube" for about 5 or more years and have said numerous times that I've learned more than I ever did in two Degrees' worth of academia. I mean, any topic from history or how-to or travel or (ad infinitum). And, yes, there are plenty of crackpot things out there. But the plain old *critical thinking* and detecting does the job of separating the wheat from the chaff. But I never knew that YouTube was supposed to "vet" (as KRASNOV says about immigration) every bit of what appears the way supposed Free-Speechers like MUSKrat and social outlets use "moderation" to do the opposite of free speechifying.

I've had a couple of doctors react furiously at the mention of "the internet" or "I saw it on Good Morning America" - them saying, " *I* am a doctor! NOT the internet! The internet is FULL of false information!" -----------Get the insulting implication there, that they think I/we are too stupid to be able to ferret out the bad stuff, cherrypick the good stuff, because we are STUPID and only they/doctors are smart enough!

*** And I started calling it "The University of YouTube" long before I heard that ROGAN was calling it something similar. In fact, I made shady comments about ROGAN, saying that he is under-educated and gets what little knowledge he has from YouTube videos.

It would cost them a fortune in legal fees to keep up with the tsunami of AI slop ripping off celebrities.

The real culprit here is YouTube for allowing this garbage.

But viewers who fall for this garbage help the fraudsters. Unwittingly, if they don't know it's fraud via AI, but sometimes they like the message from the fake celebrity being used as a puppet enough that they want to share it anyway. Which is really foolish and shows contempt for the celebrity the YouTuber is treating as a puppet.



That's completely wrong. Those AI tools work at all only because they were trained on all the copyrighted intellectual property the AI companies could steal. And even though the AI users weren't responsible for the initial theft, if they're aware the tech is based on theft, using that tech is giving a thumbs-up to the theft. And posting that AI slop looks bad, too. If you want to know how bad it looks, see this thread

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100220895856

and read all the reactions a union head got for being unthinking enough to post AI slop on Bluesky.

Videos made with AI are taking people's jobs - both the jobs of people who weren't hired to do the art, script and narration, and the jobs of humans using their own knowledge and talent to make videos, whose work is increasingly likely to get lost in that flood of absolute garbage made using AI.

That AI-slop channel you posted a history video from - about 44 Roman army rules - wasn't making cartoons. The videos there were a bizarre, jumbled mess of different styles of AI art, from cartoonlike to what's called photorealistic, just throwing any assortment of styles together as if they couldn't decide what style to use from whatever slop the image or video generator churned out (those AI tools can offer a wildly different assortment of styles at the same time). The AI-generated captions didn't always match the narration. The images often were inaccurate, showing the wrong weapons, etc.

There were a LOT of comments on YouTube under that history video about it being AI slop and inaccurate. Here are some of them:









Those sorts of errors are all too typical of AI videos supposedly offering people facts.

And those problems, combined with how unethical using AI is, are why AI slop videos shouldn't be created, promoted or shared.

And in addition to that, just viewing AI slop on YouTube, even once, makes it more likely their algorithm will keep offering you AI slop.

If you have trouble recognizing if something is AI slop, it can often help to check the YouTube comments. At least check them before sharing on DU.

on YouTube. Those slop videos should be banned. Generative AI, the type of AI used to create slop, should be banned, too. And the AI companies who were behind the theft of intellectual property to train their AI should be sued out of existence, and everyone at those AI companies involved in the theft of IP deserves to spend some time in prison.

Please see my reply 9 above, which answers your question about why famous people ripped off for these videos don't sue. And the tip I offered there, about checking YouTube comments which will often point out if a video is AI slop, is useful for anyone trying to avoid that garbage on YouTube.

Damn the AI companies and the fraudsters making this slop.

Unless youtube is told a vid is fake, what responsibility do they have for videos posted?