I don’t understand… They don’t seem to remember it because they’re not mentioning it in their stories? Why would mentioning it not count as “feeding the outrage machine”?
Help me understand.
Comment on Woman felt 'dehumanised' after Musk's Grok AI used to digitally remove her clothes
p03locke@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 week ago
These people and journalists don’t see to remember celebrity photoshops. Or maybe they do and want to continue to feed the outrage machine.
Pardon me if I duck out of my Two Minutes Hate for today.
prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 week ago
p03locke@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 week ago
Nobody is bitching about photoshopping, a thing that exists and almost anybody can do to put some person’s face on a naked body or whatever situation they want. It’s existed for decades. Suddenly, journalists are inventing a new moral panic with LLMs, saying they can do whatever they want with pictures, despite the fact that this technology already existed, it’s just a little bit easier now. It’s not a new problem, so reporting on it is just shifting the blame to a new boogeyman.
See, the magic formula is to slap the word “AI” on a headline and boom, instant attention! It doesn’t matter what it’s about, if it’s a new problem, if it’s only slightly related to the main root cause… As long as your talking shit about every angle around AI in the most extreme ways possible, mission accomplished. It is outrage reporting because there is no solutioning or historical context. The sole purpose is the outrage, because outrages generates clicks. It’s too hard for journalists to think outside the outrage box.
sem@piefed.blahaj.zone 1 week ago
You might be interested in 404 media’s coverage. They’ve been reporting on it for a while – it’s been part of Sam Cole’s beat since the vice days.
p03locke@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 week ago
No, not really.