The Science and Technology Thread | Page 33 | Vital Football

The Science and Technology Thread

Stephen Jay Hawkings said:
Yep, my mother got melanoma a few years ago, not so long ago that in particular would have been a death sentence. She's been completely cancer free for around 6 years now.

I wonder how much AI will play in finding a cure or just even better treatment.
Click to expand...

I'm not much of a technologist but I've been messing around with ai image generation. It does okay with some things but it doesn't seem to know how many fingers or legs people should have.

I'm yet to be convinced that the I in AI is up to much.
 
Last edited:
wittonite said:
I have an eleven year old nephew who designs and sells video games. Lord only knows what he will be doing when he is in his twenties. The game you posted kind of proves that you can no longer believe what you are seeing. Endless possibilities. Lots of them not good.
Click to expand...
Does he get paid?
 
colavfc said:
news.sky.com

US and China back UK deal to collaborate over potentially 'catastrophic' threats posed by AI

The UK's AI safety summit, which runs for two days, is being attended by more than 100 figures from politics and business, including the likes of OpenAI's Sam Altman, Google DeepMind's Demis Hassabis, and Elon Musk.
news.sky.com news.sky.com

The next bout of fear porn hitting our screens soon.
Click to expand...
I heard some government spokesperson on the radio this morning saying it has the potential to eradicate the entire human race. They just fuckin love it don't they.
 
mike_field said:
A: I want it.
B: I'm not totally believing that. Just yet at least.
Click to expand...

Yep, I know, not the first time a new game has showed off the wow factor, only to come out 6 months later and looked and played like shit compared to what was promised.

Still though, it's only a matter of time before something will look that good, let's see if this one is a game changer (excuse the pun, lol)
 
Stephen Jay Hawkings said:
Yep, I know, not the first time a new game has showed off the wow factor, only to come out 6 months later and looked and played like shit compared to what was promised.

Still though, it's only a matter of time before something will look that good, let's see if this one is a game changer (excuse the pun, lol)
Click to expand...

Yeah that's my thought, but it can't be denied we can't be far off that - and it worries me.

As much as that would be my game.

What twigged me was the pathetic reloading and the fannying about there, at one point the character was holding the clip next to the gun, but still looked around the corner. Fuck no, you bury your back in the wall, reload, cock if needed and then go around.

Had it not been for slight (easily fixable) moments like that, I'd have been far more scared.

And I repeat that would be my game, I love first person shooters.

I've never bought into violent games/films encourages sociopathic behaviour. I do not believe their is a true cause/effect approach to a human development (although it can feature if one is already inclined that way).

But as much as I would buy and play that game if it comes close to 50% of that realism, my kids aren't playing that with my permission.
 
Was just wondering as I dont know. Can you use pictures as evidence in a court?

With AI you can now make any image you want that is totally fake that looks 100% genuine.

So is photo evidence is now discredited?
 
Last edited:
colavfc said:
Was just wondering as I dont know. Can you use pictures as evidence in a court?

With AI you can now make any image you want that is totally fake that looks 100% genuine.

You any photo evidence is now discredited?
Click to expand...

They have been faking photos for a long time. The Soviets made an art of it, removing people from official photos after they were purged.

I would guess it would be pretty easy for an expert to spot an ai generated image. I hope so anyway.
 
These days AI has the meta trail that shows it's fake if you know what you are looking for, and as I'm oft for saying this is why we always have in journalism (or used to) a second independent verifiable source - in this case it would be other photos from a different source showing similar from a differing angle.

Photos can be used, but they need an identification and evidence line along with substantial other independent verification to be admissible, otherwise a single photo at best is circumstantial.

CCTV is different as you can investigate the tape/DVD whatever etc - you can look for hacks, changes, overwrites, false footage placed over etc. And that's why it's preferred.

Meta trail in that sense is probably the wrong phrase, but it's the same info at core - it's authentication simply put, and it's no different a process really than art using provenance to check a genuine artwork.

It's like DNA, comparing alleles has improved massively over the years further ruling out mistakes, video/photo forensics are improving just the same.

And as for BB's point, the risk of manipulation has always existed long before Photoshop came along - it's deep fakes on the net people should be worried about (much like the above game) because they aren't scrutinised or questioned, in a way evidence in a court case would be mate.
 
mike_field said:
These days AI has the meta trail that shows it's fake if you know what you are looking for, and as I'm oft for saying this is why we always have in journalism (or used to) a second independent verifiable source - in this case it would be other photos from a different source showing similar from a differing angle.

Photos can be used, but they need an identification and evidence line along with substantial other independent verification to be admissible, otherwise a single photo at best is circumstantial.

CCTV is different as you can investigate the tape/DVD whatever etc - you can look for hacks, changes, overwrites, false footage placed over etc. And that's why it's preferred.

Meta trail in that sense is probably the wrong phrase, but it's the same info at core - it's authentication simply put, and it's no different a process really than art using provenance to check a genuine artwork.

It's like DNA, comparing alleles has improved massively over the years further ruling out mistakes, video/photo forensics are improving just the same.

And as for BB's point, the risk of manipulation has always existed long before Photoshop came along - it's deep fakes on the net people should be worried about (much like the above game) because they aren't scrutinised or questioned, in a way evidence in a court case would be mate.
Click to expand...
Great explanation. Thanks Mike. I tried googling it before I asked but was met with load of sites all contradicting each other.
 
colavfc said:
Great explanation. Thanks Mike. I tried googling it before I asked but was met with load of sites all contradicting each other.
Click to expand...

I have my moments lol.

ie the jury case I was on, a neighbour had taken 3-4 (whatever) photos of the individual breaking in. No face, no identification (unless a proper expert was brought in to ascertain potential height/weight based on shadows or garden implements/windows etc) but the photo showed clear clothing with distinctive markers (ie branding) and a slight hint of skin colour was at play.

It matched exactly the individual a copper then picked up, and to boot (no pun) his boot print matched a boot print taken from the settee after climbing through a window. The neighbours photos weren't proof and on their own irrelevant, but they backed up (time, date stamped) and added to other evidence, so it becomes stronger than circumstantial when taken as a whole.

Even down to the colour of the boot - and I said boot for the pun, it was actually trainers and the colour and brand of them lol

This is why I loved my fellow jurors, they were convinced with the above - took 5 minutes tops - there was a second crime at play where the individuals blood was found inside a window frame, and some of the idiots argued 'he might have looked in to check people were okay'.

:arrghh:

Humans clearly aren't technical PMSL
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.