I've seen less than a handful of, usually shorts, on YT purporting to be body-cam footage, but they all seem too well-framed and fairly obviously scripted / staged / fake to me, because I'm actually paying attention to the 'environment' not just the 'action'.

But I doubt most doomscrollers would notice that in their half-comatose state.

It IS real, unfiltered bodycam footage. From an actor, following a script, in front of one or many other actors, also following scripts. I think that's how they get away with it, they don't specify it's bodycam footage from actual law enforcement. Yes, gross.

These videos are insane, and the lack of "this is fake" comments are disheartening.

Dang, police bodycam videos are my guilty pleasure when I'm working out and just want dumb stimulation to pass the grind.

Definitely have watched enough videos from this channel to recognize its name. :(

The website you link (disgusting people) has apparently changed.

> For Content Thieves (Warning)

> If you are currently using Body Cam Declassified content without [...]

> You are in violation of copyright law and will be subject to legal action

[...]

> We aggressively pursue legal remedies against content theft, including statutory damages of up to $150,000 per infringement under U.S. [...]

> An additional administrative fee of $2,500 per infringing video will be assessed

> We demand all revenue generated from the unauthorized use of our content

> We maintain relationships with copyright attorneys who specialize in digital media infringement

> We recommend removing the infringing content immediately and contacting us regarding settlement options

A paragraph about the videos being fake is still there.

> While actual government-produced bodycam footage may have different copyright considerations and may be subject to broader fair use provisions in some contexts, our content is NOT actual bodycam footage.

> Our videos represent original creative works that we script, film, edit, and produce ourselves.

> As privately created content (not government-produced public records), our videos are fully protected by copyright law and are NOT subject to the same fair use allowances that might apply to actual police bodycam

> The distinction means our content receives full copyright protection as creative works, similar to any other professionally produced video content.

This reminds me of a non-AI content mill business strategy that has been metastasizing for years. People who film homeless people and drug addicts and make whole Insta and Youtube channels monetizing it, either framed at "REAL rough footage from city XY" or even openly mocking helpless people. The latter seems to be more common on TikTok and I'm not watching "original" videos of such shite.

There is a special place in hell for people who do such things and in my opinion, there should be laws with very harsh punishments for the people that "create" this trash and make money from it. When it's about the filming of real people without their consent, we really need some laws that effectively allow to punish people who do this, because the victims are not likely to defend themselves.

And in total, the whole strategy is to worsen societal division and tensions, and feed bad human instincts (voyeurism, superiority complex) in order to funnel money into the pockets of parasites without ethics.

> It isn’t even a “real” racism…

Generating and distributing racist materials is racist regardless of the intent, even if the person "doesn't mean it".

Simple thought experiment: If the content was CSAM, would you still excuse the perpetrators as victims of perversely incentivized attention economics?

> make sure everyone is well aware about how their attention is the new currency in the modern age, and spend it wisely, being aware about the addictive and self-reinforcing nature of some systems.

i.e. delete your facebook, your tiktok, your youtube and return to calling people on your flip phone and writing letters (or at least emails). I say this without irony (The Sonim XP3+ is a decent device). all the social networking on smart phones has not been a net positive in most people's lives, I don't really know why we sleep walked into it. I'm open to ideas how to make living "IRL" more palatable than cyberspace. It's like telling people to stop smoking cigarettes. I guess we just have to reach a critical mass of people who can do without it and lobby public spaces to ban it. Concert venues and schools are already playing with it by forcing everyone to put their phones in those faraday baggies so maybe it's not outlandish.

> It isn’t even a “real” racism, it’s more of a flamebait

I think the harm done by circulating racist media is "real" racism regardless of whether someone is doing it because they have hateful ideology, are profiting for it, or just having a good time.

I don't even think it's flamebait, people just like being edgy on the internet so they enjoy these memes, reading the comments under these posts would probably confirm what I'm saying.

>And the only low-harm way - that I can think of - how to put this genie back in the bottle is to make sure everyone is well aware about how their attention is the new currency in the modern age, and spend it wisely, being aware about the addictive and self-reinforcing nature of some systems.

Gonna be hard to admit, but mandatory identity verification like in Korea, i.e attaching real consequences to what happens in the internet is more realistic way this is going to be solved. We've have "critical thinking" programs for decades, it's completely pointless on a aggregate scale, primairly because the majority aren't interested in the truth. Save for their specific expertise, it's quite common for even academics to easily fall into misinformation bubbles.

It's entirely appropriate to blame a technology if the answer to the question, "Does this technology make a longstanding social problem worse or better?" is "It makes it worse."

There can be a follow-on discussion about what, if any, benefits are also provided by aforesaid technology

Granted that racism is not new, the infinite production of automated content drowning out any genuine human opinion is a harbinger of the internet to come.

The problem is not that they are fooling anyone. No one thinks a woman is marrying a chimpanzee. The problem is that the videos are obviously and openly racist and being spread quite brazenly.

If I have to encounter a constant barrage of shitty racist (or sexist, or homophobic, or whatever) material just to exist online, I'm going to pretty quickly feel like garbage. (If not feel unsafe.) Especially if I'm someone who has other stressors in their life. Someone who is doing well, their life otherwise together, might encounter these and go, "Fucking idiots made a racist video, block."

But empathize with someone who is struggling? Who just worked 18 hours to make ends meet to come home and feed their kids and pay rent for a shitty apartment that doesn't fit everyone, and their kid comes up to them asking what this video means, and it just... gets past all their barriers. It wedges open so many doubts.

This isn't harmless.

I’m old enough to remember when video killed the radio star.

The scientists were absolutely occupied with if we should. But the CEOs steamrolled them and had it built anyway.

from an information theory perspective, predicting and efficiently representing data is so closely tied to generation that it is unavoidable.

if you want to use ML to do anything at all with image and video, you will usually wind up creating the capability to generate image and video one way or another.

however building a polished consumer product is a choice, and probably a mistake. every technology has good and bad uses, but there seem to be few and trivial good uses for image/video generation, with many severe bad uses.

Every generation has their “I miss the time before ‘thing I don’t like’ became a thing”.

In our case, it’s just generative AI.

[flagged]

I’ve seen lots of them which I found very very amusing. That seems good enough for me. Think about it: there are channels on YouTube and on the telly that are there just to amuse you. So a system that creates amusing videos is a net positive for the world.

Some of TikTok is great. I mean, most of it is just dopamine hits, and it's potentially quite bad from a health perspective. But also, plenty of TikTok is news, or political theory, or thoughtful commentary, or explanations of how things work.

It's a bowl of fun size candy bars, with a few razors, a few drugs, a few rotten apples, etc. mixed in. You can, by and large, get the algorithm to serve you nothing but the candy, but you are still eating only candy bars at that point.

Some people can say no to infinite candy. Other people, like myself, cannot and it's a real problem.

Nice callback. That was a golden era.

To what end? You want to fingerprint all AI images and video to catch people who make racist videos in order too to do what? It isn't illegal. If TikTok doesn't like the content they can delete the video and the account. If Google or OpenAI doesn't want the content being created, they can figure out a way to block it, and delete the user's accounts in the meantime.

If I told you many 14 year olds were making very similar offensive jokes at lunch in high school, would you support adding microphones throughout schools to track and catch them?

I've been wondering if ChatGPT makes such excessive use of EM dash just so people can easily identify AI generated content.

Google wouldn't even need a fingerprint, they could just look up from their logs who generated the video.

Eventually as models become cheaper, the big companies that would do this won't have control over newer generated content, so it's fairly pointless.

Until we get a LLM that actually "thinks", it's just a tool like photoshop. Photoshop isn't racist if someone uses it to create racist material, so a LLM wouldn't be racist either.