特朗普回应人工智能生成的“特朗普的敏捷”图像

币界网Published on 2024-08-22Last updated on 2024-08-22

币界网报道:

唐纳德·特朗普最近在他的社交媒体平台Truth social上分享了泰勒·斯威夫特的人工智能生成图像后,发现自己陷入了争议。这些看似显示斯威夫特支持这位前总统的照片引发了很多讨论和争议。

这也引发了更多关于人工智能在政治沟通和特朗普行为中的作用的问题。周末,唐纳德·特朗普在他的平台上转发了几张照片,将泰勒·斯威夫特描绘成支持他的总统竞选,这是错误的。

特朗普否认了解图像来源

最受欢迎的照片之一是斯威夫特穿着山姆大叔的衣服,上面写着:“泰勒想让你投票给唐纳德·特朗普。”特朗普还发布了年轻女性穿着“斯威夫特支持特朗普”衬衫的照片。特朗普在他的社交媒体平台上转发了这些照片,并配文“我接受!”。

在接受福克斯商业频道Grady Trimble的采访时,特朗普被问及这些照片,以及他是否担心斯威夫特可能采取的法律行动。特朗普声称他不知道这些图像的来源,他说:“除了别人生成的图像外,我对它们一无所知。我没有生成它们。”

特朗普进一步评论了人工智能的危险,他说:“人工智能总是以这种方式非常危险……这也发生在我身上。他们让我说话。我在人工智能上说得很完美,我的意思是,绝对完美,而且我支持其他产品和事物。这有点危险。”

版权问题困扰特朗普竞选媒体

这不是最近围绕特朗普竞选活动的第一次社交媒体争议。本周早些时候,特朗普竞选发言人张五常发布了一段视频,显示特朗普在密歇根州下飞机。这段发布的视频以碧昂斯的歌曲《自由》为特色,在这位歌手声称侵犯版权后不久就被删除了,这进一步质疑了该活动的版权合规性。

这些照片发布之际,粉丝们怀疑这位歌手是否会支持特朗普的民主党对手、副总统哈里斯。斯威夫特支持拜登总统2020年的总统竞选。埃隆大学最近的一项研究发现,76%的美国人担心人工智能可能被用来影响选举。此外,47%的人表示他们很难区分真实图像和操纵图像。

根据这项研究,这导致许多人对他们获得的信息失去了信心,从而也影响了他们对他人的信任。由于没有联邦法律来管理人工智能在选举过程中的使用,选民别无选择,只能寻求其他来源来帮助他们确定他们收到的信息是真实的还是虚假的。

Related Reads

You Use Claude and Codex Every Day, but Meta Has Restricted Internal Use

In May, Meta imposed internal restrictions on its engineers regarding the use of Claude Code and Codex, two widely used AI programming tools. Despite being a major client, Meta's guidelines, still in effect, prohibit these external models from being used for specific tasks to prevent potential "escalations with partners." The core concern is "distillation"—the risk that outputs from Claude or Codex could inadvertently contaminate the training data and evaluation processes for Meta's in-house AI coding assistant, MetaCode. If MetaCode is trained or evaluated using data generated by these external models, it risks learning their capabilities rather than developing its own, blurring the line of intellectual origin. The restrictions are precise: engineers cannot use the external models to generate test questions, debug source code, or suggest test cases. AI-generated content is also barred from environments accessible to MetaCode. However, AI can still assist with peripheral tasks like workflow setup and code organization, provided all outputs are manually reviewed. This caution reflects a broader industry dilemma. While distillation is a common technique, using a competitor's model output for training raises legal and ethical questions about the ownership of derived capabilities. Contractual terms from companies like OpenAI and Anthropic explicitly forbid using their outputs to build competing products, putting enforcement power in the hands of rivals. The move is also financially motivated, as Meta seeks to reduce its hefty internal AI spending, estimated in the billions this year. Meta's policy illustrates the delicate balance companies must strike: leveraging powerful external AI tools while safeguarding the integrity and independence of their own AI development. As AI systems increasingly help build other AIs, distinguishing the origin of capabilities becomes a fundamental challenge for the entire industry.

marsbit2h ago

You Use Claude and Codex Every Day, but Meta Has Restricted Internal Use

marsbit2h ago

Why Do We Need an AI Content Perspective Today?

The article "Why Do We Need an AI Content Perspective Today?" explores the complex and often contentious integration of AI into the cultural and creative industries, particularly film and television. It begins with the cancellation of Amazon's AI-generated animation "Punky Duck," highlighting the ethical debates surrounding AI content. AI's rapid advancement is transforming video production, enabling cost-effective, full-length AI films (e.g., "RAPHAEL," "Dreams of Violets") while sparking industry resistance over issues like "synthetic actors." The core debate has shifted from whether to use AI to how to use it responsibly. The article analyzes why AI's entry into film is uniquely unsettling. It distinguishes between "cultural fast food" (short-form, fast-paced content like micro-dramas) and "cultural main courses" (traditional, long-form film/TV). AI currently excels at the former, matching its fragmented narratives, shallow emotional needs, and free-to-consumer models. However, venturing into the latter challenges the human-centric essence of storytelling—creativity, emotional depth, and the unique value of human labor and experience. While AI can generate massive volumes of content and lower costs, it risks devaluing human creativity, leading to homogenized output, and creating unfair competition through potential intellectual property infringement. Its efficiency also amplifies content safety risks, making preemptive governance crucial. To counter these risks, the article proposes establishing clear boundaries guided by a human-centered AI content perspective. It outlines four principles: 1) Amplify, rather than displace, human creative space; 2) Respect and protect human creative output; 3) Ensure human creative control and responsibility remain paramount; and 4) Guarantee transparency and traceability in AI creation. The conclusion emphasizes that humans must act as the "helmsmen" of technology, steering AI development to enhance, not replace, the core human values at the heart of cultural expression.

marsbit3h ago

Why Do We Need an AI Content Perspective Today?

marsbit3h ago

Trading

Spot
活动图片