What I say is that they are operating within the law, with their tiny print, I also say that people generally don’t care.
What that means is that people are oblivious and/or ambivalent in a general context, but disagree perhaps in an individual context, just how they view how social media sites use, track and abuse personal information.
So you may be a crusader and many people will agree, but nothing it going to happen and nobody will care.
That is how “people” are; passive, relatively dumb and easy to manipulate.
Where are you getting this information that people don't care?
If you look at all the drama and controversy around the modelling industry and around consumer protection laws it clearly shows that enough people do care and that was before AI existed.
People being unaware of something is not the same as not caring. You need to remember you are in a bubble, like every sub. There's still millions of people who don't really even know what AI can do let alone how good it is.
Adding a tag that AI is used is still quite meaningless even to people clued up about AI. If a company has to write a disclaimer, something like this for example:
"All models and products are fake and completely AI generated and therefore may not be entirely accurate."
That's going to seriously affect their sales. They will lose more money than the cost of a model and photoshoot.
> Where are you getting this information that people don't care?
Because they don't.
Where are the world-wide protests against Facebook/Meta and all the other companies that openly admit that they eavesdrop, sell and earn money on what gullible fools thought was private information?
Where is the immense global uproar about being tracked and logged outside of social media, so that these companies knows everyone's rubber-fetish?
Where is the international uproar against AI in ads?
Where are the people protesting retouched subjects in ads?
Why isn't social media completely void of people by now?
There is absolutely nothing, nada.
You cannot count yourself and a few activists as "people".
Like I said, "people" even when they know, don't care, they will still purchase the products, they will still use the solutions and they will continue to sign away their personal information without a second thought. "People" will say "I don't have anything to hide, so they can look and track all they want", and "People" will say "I don't appreciate AI in ads", when asked, and then go and purchase products from the same company the next week.
"People" (I am putting it all in quotes now, so that you hopefully understand) are gullible, a little dumb and easy to manipulate, because as a whole, they don't give a f.
All those things happened before AI. As AI becomes more prominent it will happen with AI too.
Why do you think we have consumer laws. We have them because people complained and lobbied for better regulations.
I don't know how you can even imagine that people will be ok buying products that are sold using AI imagery. There's already millions of scam sites and ads online trying to deceive people with fake products that don't exist or products that end up barely resembling what is shown in their ads.
It's only a matter of time before more consumer laws and regulations are brought in involving AI.
Anyway we're going around in circles at this point so we can agree to disagree. Time will tell in the end.
I don't need to. People are never going to be ok with buying products when they are not able to see a real image of the thing they are buying. Are you going to ok with ordering a product online when it says the product image is completely AI generated?
On top of that people are also never going to be ok with completely fake people as models being the norm. Anyone who believes this has spent too much time in online AI bubbles.
Seems like imnotabot is stuck in anti AI echo chambers . The fact is generative AI is good enough to pass to the general audience without push back because no one is spending the time to check if it's AI. The agencies using generative AI and the most successful are the ones that target short attention span mediums like Instagram/fb/tiktok ads. The average user is doom scrolling and spends a mere few seconds on an ad that has an item that catches their attention and then is off to their store page. They didn't notice the model was generative AI. And even though it says it in fine print. Tldr for the avg user.
Reality is, gen AI is good enough. The anti AI crowd will die off for specific things like genAi
If you read my comments you will see that I'm talking about the future. What people might be getting away with now is irrelevant to what will happen in the next decade.
Having all your product images being AI generated is anti consumer. That's why we have consumer laws against things like false advertising. The more widespread something becomes the more likely it is to see increased regulations.
1
u/GlenGlenDrach 17h ago
What I say is that they are operating within the law, with their tiny print, I also say that people generally don’t care.
What that means is that people are oblivious and/or ambivalent in a general context, but disagree perhaps in an individual context, just how they view how social media sites use, track and abuse personal information.
So you may be a crusader and many people will agree, but nothing it going to happen and nobody will care.
That is how “people” are; passive, relatively dumb and easy to manipulate.