Trump posts video statement after fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk
youtu.be
President Trump posted a video statement to his social media platform after the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk on a Utah college campus. –––Subscribe to ABC ...

At 18 seconds into this speech Trumps Pinky disappears under his hand and his ring finger ‘becomes’ his pinky. This is clearly AI.

  • kingofras@lemmy.world
    2117·
    4 months ago

    Hijacking top post again, to point out the red flags

    • 🚩OP posted ABC official video with custom made post title to suit his narrative
    • 🚩OP used a software AI detector (made by AI unbeknownst to them) to tell that this video is ~70% chance of being AI, not their own expertise or critical thinking
    • 🚩 OP is misdirecting the audience by making them focus on a specific part to support their narrative instead of letting the video speak for itself.
    • 🚩 all the anomalies happen around the 0:19 timestamp. The blur in the tree leaves in the window, the face/mouth movement and the hands. Occam’s razor would tell you this is a classic cross dissolve.

    There’s no such thing as an AI filter on this. It’s plain old video editing. He misspoke as I explained below.

    I want this guy gone and out of our lives as much as the next guy, but if we lose our critical thinking skills and will begin with these herd upvote stampedes without even considering OP might be trying to steer the narrative, we lose a lot of credibility with potential (new high quality) users.

    This seems to be posted on a fringe instance on a poorly moderated community, hence me going hard against this, as I don’t think reporting this post with help. So please downvote this post.

    • 4am@lemmy.zip
      4·
      4 months ago

      There is an “AI powered” cross dissolve that can be done to hide jump cuts in long takes.

      Google “Morph Cut in Premiere Pro”

    • krunklom@lemmy.zip
      86·
      4 months ago

      This is a pretty assinine take

      • you’re not rebutting this.
      • does this program work or not? You’re making an ad hominem attack rather providing any insight into whether this detector is or is not effective or why
      • op is offering supporting evidence for their position. Is this evidence valid or not? What the fuck does “let the video speak for itself” mean? If you don’t agree with evidence argument with your own
      • occam’s razor states that the simpelst explanation is usually the correct one. It is a broadly applicable maxim to help one think critically. If this is or is not a cross dissolve then show fucking evidence. Make arguments.

      Jfc

      • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
        24·
        4 months ago

        You’re fighting hard against a well reasoned set of points. The only evidence possible here is looking at it with your eyes.

        • krunklom@lemmy.zip
          52·
          4 months ago

          This isn’t what reason looks like. Reason is supported by arguments and evidence.

          And your reading comprehension is truly awful if you think I’m fighting for anything. These are not well reasoned points. I am not arguing against them or for them, I am not arguing for the op or against the op.

          • kingofras@lemmy.world
            28·
            4 months ago

            I am not arguing against them or for them

            ok, and the OP just wrote to me he doesn’t care either way. That’s the problem. You and OP are just apathetic muppets bored out of your mind, no strong beliefs either way, but don’t mind accidentally spreading misinformation.

            If you don’t care, what are you doing on this platform arguing? You realise there are more people on Reddit you can troll right? We’re trying something different here.

      • kingofras@lemmy.world
        27·
        4 months ago

        I have in the other comment thread. This is an echo chamber where people are clearly not open to factual discussion.