I like to think humans will go back to interacting with each other in person thanks to AI destroying the internet
this post was submitted on 14 Jun 2025
615 points (100.0% liked)
Greentext
6498 readers
948 users here now
This is a place to share greentexts and witness the confounding life of Anon. If you're new to the Greentext community, think of it as a sort of zoo with Anon as the main attraction.
Be warned:
- Anon is often crazy.
- Anon is often depressed.
- Anon frequently shares thoughts that are immature, offensive, or incomprehensible.
If you find yourself getting angry (or god forbid, agreeing) with something Anon has said, you might be doing it wrong.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Reputation and PGP signatures could be used to verify real human made content. That is, of course, if people actually care, which I think will be rare.
There might be no-ai communities, that require this and are closed down to avoid being scraped for ai training.
Edit: Also AI is already enshittifiying itself, which might get worse if it becomes more widespread than it already is.
I like webghost0101's Idea:
[...] a blockchain linked video camera where metadata of footage gets written into the chain to combat fake news and misinformation.
The goal would be to create a proof and record of original footage, to which media publishers and people who share can link towards to verify authenticity/author.
If the media later gets manipulated or reframed you would be able to verify this by comparing it to the original record.
blockchain is a totally useless extra bit glued on there. All the real evidence will be the cryptographic signatures added by the hardware manufacturer (which can be faked, but requires extracting the keys from the "security chip" in the camera which may be very difficult)
all the blockchain does at that point is provide a timestamp of "signed hash of the picture+metadata was uploaded on x date" which can easily be done without blockchain too
Yeah, the interface between the analog reality and its digital representation will always be the weak point. But, such a scheme could at least mean that whatever reality is going to be represented at least needs to be decided relatively quickly after the moment has passed, rather than it being possible to create whatever video helps the most well after the fact.
Like if someone is trying to frame someone of some crime, with video authentication, they need to create and authenticate a video based on when they want the supposed crime to occur. Without it, they could find out when their target has alibi gaps and just target that time after the fact.
Though another bit on reality's side is corroborating with other nearby cameras. If my camera says you walked onto my property at 8:00 and left at 8:30, there should be nearby cameras I don't own that pick you up before and after those times. Every camera that has an angle should pick it up. Though advantage goes to those with many cameras, since real footage or fake, they'd be better able to create a longer narrative and dispute conflicting narratives.
Why couldn't AI use PGP signatures that suggest they're human?
Throw the technical bit away. Just think of it as a signature. Yes, an old school, written-with-hand signature.
Does the bank trust me giving you $100 by you having this cheque? Yes. Why? Because I told them what my name is and what my signature is like.
Will the bank give you $100 if you stole my cheque and sign your name on it?
Its not about "just having a signature". Its about a web of trust. It only works if you verify if the key belongs to a creator that is actually a person.
Basically creators go to a convention and hand out their public key in person and have other creators sign their key. If you trust creator A is real and they signed the key of creator B, you can have some trust B is also real. And if your buddy went to the convention, met A and B, got their public keys and tells you they are real you can also trust they are real. The more steps/signatures you are away from a creator the less trustworthy they are and nothing really ensures a (human) creator doesn't use AI secretly. If somebody is found to be a fraud everyone has to distrust their key.
Trust is the most important part. You trust someone they made something themselves. They digitally sign their work with a public key that is known to be theirs. You can now verify they (the person you trust) made it.
Once the trusted creator's key is leaked, they are no longer trusted for future works.
AI made content can be freely signed as well, but if you don't trust the origin, the signature doesn't matter anyway since it will just verify it is coming from the AI creator.
The key thing is trust, the signature is just there to verify.
What is stopping a human from gaining a reputation with a signature, and then selling it (a la reddit accounts)?
I love my computer, you make me feel alright! every waking hour, and every lonely night! I love my computer, for all you give to me! predictable errors, and no identity! and it's never been quite so easy, I've never been quite so happy!!! all I need to do, is click on you, and we'll be joined in the most soul-less way! and we'll never ever ruin each other's day, cuz when I'm through I just click, and you just go away! I love my computer, you're always in the mood! I get turned on, when I turn on you! I love my computer, you never ask for more! you can be a princess, or you can be my whore! and it's never been quite so easy. I've never been quite so happy!!! the world outside is so big, but it's safe in my domain, because to you, I'm just a number and a clever screen name! all I need to do is click on you! and we'll be together for eternity, and no one is ever gonna take my love from me, because I've got security, her password and a key!
Photorealistic porns? What's your problem, man? You have realistic AI and this is all you'll have? Just order a silicon doll and put an AI chip into it! Free ~~sex-sla~~ wife!
Marketable idea right here
Read classics:
Pride and Prejudice" by Jane Austen, "Moby Dick" by Herman Melville, "The Great Gatsby" by F. Scott Fitzgerald, and "1984" by George Orwell.
Start here. There are thousands.
Why start there with British and US authors? Why not 100 years of solitude, Disgrace, and dream of red mansions?
Because that was what he came up with. It's fine to start with. Your selection is fine too to start with.
Not gonna double my response - OP deserved it more - I will say another 'fair enough', give you an upvote, and leave it at that
For the same reason your user name is not buendiablo?
I guess we can all suffer a little eurocentrism from time to time? But yes — enrich the list with international voices! One of my favorite novels is THE PONDS OF WAGABA by Elichi Amadi… a little known gem any fan of George Eliot would love.
Good response, happy with that. Sorry about the implications, I think I just found it a fusty conservative choice. Had it been Infinite Jest and Chaucer I probably wouldn't have bothered responding. Sometimes the idea of 'classics' can seem... narrow and dull. Just wanted to mitigate the notion it was all brown bread (not that I don't love your suggestions tho')
Getting back to the AI entertainment nightmare predicted in the image… what does it mean if all that happens… it reminds me of all the fat useless humans in WALL-E. It’s like what is the point of anything if that actually IS the future?
It largely won't happen. We're near a ceiling on what predictive models can do, and it's still painfully obvious when something's bot-generated. Porn is one where I can actually see that changing because people have never minded absolutely trash porn, but the arts as they currently exist are not gonna vanish
Time to get up and go outside :)
That porn had to be trained on real people's bodies who will never see a penny of it. That's laundered revenge porn.
Simetimes I think the future will resemble the pre-internet era. AI content will be so easy to create that the zone will be flooded with shit, and only a few reputable sources will be trusted, like when there were only a few TV news channels.
Video evidence is relatively easy to fix, you just need camera ICs to cryptographically sign their outputs. If the image/video is tampered with (or even re-encoded) the signature won't match. As the private key is (hopefully!) stored securely in the hardware IC taking the photo/video, any generated images or videos can't be signed by such a private key.
So whatever way the camera output is being signed, what's stopping you from signing an altered video with a similar private key and then saying "you can all trust that my video is real because I have the private key for it."
The doubters will have to concede that the video did indeed come from you because it pairs with your key, but why would anyone trust that the key came from the camera step instead of coming from the editing step?
Mate, digital cinema uses this encryption /decryption method for KDMs.
The keys are tied into multiple physical hardware ids, many of which (such as player/.projector ) are also married cryptographically. Any deviation along a massive chain and you get no content.
Those playback keys are produced from DKDMs that are insanely tightly controlled. The DKDM production itself even more so.
And that's just to play a movie. This is proven tech, decades old. You're not gonna break it with premiere.
load more comments
(12 replies)
load more comments
(5 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
in fact, this green text was made purely from asking chatgpt what ai will look like in 10 years
load more comments
(7 replies)
I wonder if personal websites with links to each other, like in the olden days, will start growing in popularity again because of how trust is slowly eroded for anything not in your direct control, and search engines becoming more and more useless 🤔
load more comments
(5 replies)
Actually, polls show that most people are not fond of AI-generated content and want it to be labelled or don't want it at all.
As for generating your own entertainment at home, see interactive movies. They did not take off because people don't want to be "working" for their entertainment. That's their time to relax and not make decisions.
All in all, we're not as careless as it may seem.
load more comments
(3 replies)
I think this vastly overestimates the average person's ability to recognise or even care to recognise what is AI and what is not.
You've got all those videos on Facebook which are BLATANTLY AI and the comment section is split between "wow, amazing!" and "it's AI you fucking morons"
The latter will eventually leave the platform and the former will be all that's left.
Then people jack of to manga (and more) knowing it is not real, and sees through the computer generated images in star treck but still love it. I think you underestimate how malleable the human mind is when we want to!
Hentai has a story though. The characters have experiences and respond to them. There is a continuity to it. It wouldn't be nearly as popular if it was just random variations on a theme for every image. That's super fucking boring. It's not about how real or true the images are, it's about how good the story is at making us feel horny. AI gen slop can't even tell a coherent story at all.
*Yet!
I mean the story arc of most films, books etc is the same 9 step growing character one, bet hentai isn't that crazily overworked either.
But let's hope humans will continue making interesting stuff!
load more comments
(6 replies)
This guy bought so many rare monkey tokens. Ai is impressive in some aspects, but it's not nearly as impressive as the marketing that drives the massive amounts of investment into it.
The US economy is doing anything it can to create growth, which is causing investors to create a bubble around AI that is "too big to fail".
Yeah. I ran into some ai generated porn a while ago without realizing it immediately and initially it was certainly very hot. Once i realized what it was my interest died completely and I realized the flaw with ai gen porn is the complete lack of narrative continuity, especially in the meta sense. You will only ever get the first thing you see and maybe some similar looking derivatives. You'll never get it to make a true story exploring ideas and boundaries, or even just being able to make the same character consistently, let alone in different circumstances or within a larger meta context. It's the most soulless art possible. It says nothing and it means nothing, and people are going to realize they care about those things when the novelty wears off.
load more comments
(3 replies)
view more: next ›