all 24 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 97 points 3 months ago (8 children)
  • [–] 51 points 3 months ago (5 children)

    Because of course. Who could have seen that coming before they added it

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 31 points 3 months ago (4 children)

    What on Earth was every the intended use of this feature? I just can't think of any way to use it other than vandalism and misinformation.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 3 months ago

    It's intended use was misinformation but perhaps not in the way you imagine.

    Rather than producing credible images, these sorts of projects undermine actual credible images.

    For example, if you're team zion, then when shown images of how devastating Israel's attack on Gaza has been you can just disregard them as "probably fake".

    "Oh pish posh, a child can create these images on google maps".

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago

    I'm guessing that either a few devs thought it could be a cool toy and never gave a second thought about the ramifications (I can remotely understand that) or a bunch of managers who just dont give a shit thought they could monetize it

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 31 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 child)

    Google is run my by assholes and idiots. Break it apart.

    Edit: fixed silly typo

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 52 points 3 months ago

    This is old news; backlash was immediate and the "feature" was rescinded.

  • source
  • [–] 18 points 3 months ago

    It might have been that plan all along, but now you can't tell someone to just google it. You can't believe google results anymore.

  • source
  • [–] 28 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    Don't even understand what this AI feature was even supposed to be for. I'm certainly not going to rely on an AI to annotate satellite imagery. This was always just a stupid marketing thing with no real purpose behind it.

    For all of Google's faults, which of course are numerous, they do have some really talented engineers working for them, and it's just a shame that their time is constantly wasted on crap like this rather than on useful features that people would actually benefit from.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 3 months ago

    wow...! people is using a feature that allows you to modify the appearance of a location anywhere on earth to add craters to places!! truly an unforseeable tragedy.

  • source
  • [–] 16 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    Those are balls.

    This close, they always look like landscape. But nope, you're looking at balls.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago

    Nano banana!

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago

    I mean, it does seem fun. I don't want to turn it off. But maybe insert a hash into the image that makes it clear it's fake

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago* (1 child)

    Eh, this one's fixable, because you only have a few sources of legit imagery, and it's all contemporary and digital. Just have Google Earth render the image server-side and add a cryptographic signature to any legit satellite images that someone saves.

    You can have AI-generated satellite imagery and image-is-proof satellite images coexisting. Can't do that for most images, but for this particular niche, you can.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • 16 comments in c/fuck_ai@lemmy.world view that post
    [–] 9 points 3 months ago*

    I wonder why google would want a service that makes it harder to discern what satellite images of bombed out homes are real or fake, and why they would want this kind of program to be publically accessible.

  • source
  • [–] 14 points 3 months ago (6 children)
  • [–] [S] 43 points 3 months ago* (4 children)

    It's still an instructive case:

    1. It was foreseeable (and, probably, foreseen by many people at Google) that the tool would be used in harmful ways.
    2. Google released it anyway

    This is textbook negligence. Unjustified refusal to avoid a foreseeable harm.

    That pattern of negligence is the AI boom in a nutshell.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    I wonder if they are just so careless that they don't consider any implications of what they were doing, or are they testing waters about how much reaction they receive?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago

    I hate AI, and I love maps. If I had to use AI, this would be the most tolerable way. My emails to the local traffic engineering department would get a lot more spicy! Thankfully we have GIMP so I don't have to kill the earth to make satellite photos.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago

    I said it before, this is the perfect tool to cause confusion and plausible deniability, released just as the US and Israel is mounting losses of military bases and equipment fror their illegal wars and invasions all over the Middle East.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago

    Article doesn't load. Please don't share links to 404media

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago
    [+] 1 point 3 months ago (1 child)
  • 1 comment in c/technology@piefed.social view that post
    [–] 16 points 3 months ago

    Google's solution to images altered with their AI: just use their AI to determine if they're fake.

    There's a little problem though: people who assume it's real won't get told. Not even through their own AI. I downloaded the fake protest picture and asked, using the persona of someone naive.

    n2W0JVTBwv6tcrL.png

    Then I asked if it was real. Only then did it bother to check:

    Sl1bNcmWOqqI0mw.png

    So Google will only fulfill their promise if you yourself act as a skeptic at all times. I love the erosion of trust online, as pushed by major tech companies.

  • source