- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.ml
- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.ml
The Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP’s) national internet censor just announced that all AI-generated content will be required to have labels that are explicitly seen or heard by its audience and embedded in metadata. The Cyberspace Administration of China (CAC) just released the transcript for the media questions and answers (akin to an FAQ) on its Measures for the Identification of Artificial Intelligence Generated and Synthetic Content [machine translated]. We saw the first signs of this policy move last September when the CAC’s draft plans emerged.
This regulation takes effect on September 1, 2025, and will compel all service providers (i.e., AI LLMs) to “add explicit labels to generated and synthesized content.” The directive includes all types of data: text, images, videos, audio, and even virtual scenes. Aside from that, it also orders app stores to verify whether the apps they host follow the regulations.
Users will still be able to ask for unlabeled AI-generated content for “social concerns and industrial needs.” However, the generating app must reiterate this requirement to the user and also log the information to make it easier to trace. The responsibility of adding the AI-generated label and metadata falls on the shoulders of this end-user person or entity.
You must log in or register to comment.
…I’m…
In full agreement with this*
*with the provision that there are ways to ensure this isn’t weaponized so that dissident or oppositional speech/photos/art isn’t flagged as AI so that it can be filtered out.
It doesn’t matter whether this is used against dissidents or not. Their speech is censured either way. It shouldn’t affect the much larger positive effect this will have on the majority of people.
This does provide another tool for them to claim it isn’t censored but label it as AI to hurt the credibility of dissidents though. I don’t think it doesn’t matter.
So in short you disagree which is reasonable given the circumstances.
Besides, wouldn‘t it make much more sense to verify and mark genuine content rather than the slob which is becoming the majority of content?
I like that approach better. Just like I’d rather know what doesn’t cause cancer in the state of California at this point.
Or propaganda that doesn’t have it is taken as legitimate.
That doesn’t change anything though.
There are no ways of ensuring that. Wanting this is suicide for anyone but authoritarians.
Then it should not be done. I laid out my conditionals for it not being terrible.
When the dirty commies do the reforms we all know we need in our countries…
We’re so fucked. ⚰️
As a dirty commie: you’ll get over it someday.
Meanwhile best we can do in America is hide tracking dots in every color printer.
Anyone’s praising this doesn’t understand that this request is basically impossible and is merely posturing.
I’m a developer and I work a lot with LLM data and the only way to detect LLM text is through watermarks where some words or expressions are statistically preferred over others. This means it’s only effective on large bodies of text that are not modified further.
If you take LLM content and remix it using traditional natural language processing then it’s done - the content is indistinguishable and untraceable and it takes like 50 lines of python code and a few milliseconds of computing.
A government policy isn’t just posturing because the state now has a rule to cite if they’re gonna issue you a fine or whatever the punishment is supposed to be. So you will either comply, or go underground or abroad. That’s a real consequence.
So it’s just another way for authoritarians to exert power over people then?
The only way to address AI is through low level laws we already have like anti-discrimination, defamation, online bullying etc. But those give people more rights and protections and you can’t have that.
it’s just another way for authoritarians to exert power over people then?
exert power over people to stop them from doing what?
I mean you can just say that about any and every law or policy. No need to be so knee-jerk about it. The point I’m making is it isn’t just posturing. It’s not like a company pretending to promise to watermark their AI outputs; it’s a government saying you must comply with new rule.
deleted by creator
100% thats exactly what’s happening and I can’t believe people are so blinded by AI generato hate to praise stuff like that.
Removed by mod
It’s impossible because the text these LLM-based models produce would be obtuse to watermark.
Huh?
What about photos and video and audio?! Why are you asking?
What about photos, videos and audio? You should see what the second L means in the LLM before you go at it
The directive includes all types of data: text, images, videos, audio, and even virtual scenes.
LLMs are only one aspect of this, but yeah, probably the most difficult to discern, at least at the moment.
You should read some of the content you’re commenting on before posting a critique.
They don’t want to pollute their training data.
Honestly?
Good. I assume this is more about controlling narratives but it’s something that should be happening no matter what side of the AI debate you’re on.
I suggest the shit emjoi being used as the indicator.
My favorite genre of comment section is when every other post is talking about how someone/thing the poster doesn’t like does something they think is good but they gotta reassure everyone that it’ll still be bad.
Yeah, he saved the kitten from the tree, But at what cost? 😔
China does good thing Average lemmitor: this is bad actually
Says the .ml tankie in a thread full of lemmings expressing support and agreement with it
LMAO why don’t y’all take care of your censorship problems on .ml first
Removing sinophobia =/= censorship.
Ah yes, “Sinophobia” classic tankie comeback #14 when people talk about the human rights violations of the CCP
Yeah, because this wont be used to hurt dissidence. Laws like this are meant to aid authoritarians.
