In the short term, yes. Over the long run, I think it's good that we move away from the "seeying is believing" model, since that was already abused by bad actors/propaganda Hopefully, not too much chaos until we find another solution.

No, people have been making photorealistic and convincing images in photoshop for ages.

This specifically? No. We’ve been on this path a while now.

The general idea of indistinguishable real/fake images; yeah

Look closer at the fingers. These models still don’t have a firm handle on them. The right elbow on the second picture also doesn’t quite look anatomically possible.

> AI is bad and unconvincing

> if its not unconvincing, its soulless (only because I was told in advance that its AI)

> if its not soulless then its using too much energy

I’m not sure what your point is. This subthread is about whether AI-generated pictures can be distinguished from real photographs. For the pictures in the article, which are already cherry-picked (“best of 8”), the answer is yes. Therefore I don’t quite share the worries of GP.

Nah, I'll maybe start taking them seriously when they can draw someone grating cheese, but holding the cheese and the grater as if they were playing violin.

Not really, but only because literally every person I've met that spends a lot of time on TikTok starts spouting unhinged nonsense at me.

You don't even need deepfakes. https://www.newsweek.com/doug-mastriano-pennsylvania-senator...

The disaster scenario is already here.

it's fine, there will be new jobs.

Yes, but not in time to save the people who were in the old jobs. Plus retraining.

over 10 years it might even out, if your lucky (historically its taken much longer) but 10 years is a long time to wait in your career.

Like rebuilding society from the ashes

The problem isnt really jobs imo. I think wed need to rework the system itself because working shouldnt be necessary anymore. Time for some communism.