you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[+] -7 points 5 days ago* (1 child)

No, it does not lol. AI can distort half-truths / half-lies, take things out of context, but yes can also fabricate entirely.

Remember: LOW CREDIBILITY

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 5 days ago (1 child)

    LMAO it's a fucking video dude. You're saying you're NOT saying it's AI while claiming it might be AI? What part of the video is real and what part is AI and what part is taken out of context. You're just pulling shit out of your ass.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -5 points 5 days ago* (1 child)

    Videos can't be AI?

    "LOW CREDIBILITY"

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 5 days ago* (1 child)

    You just outright refuse to read the fact that they have never been found to make up facts. That would include making fake AI videos dude.

    Anyway thanks for admitting you refuse to take a look at the facts and instead are screaming ITS FAKE with no evidence to back it up other than feels.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -4 points 5 days ago* (1 child)

    Funny, it's like you think given their LOW CREDIBILITY that they wouldn't have a first (even assuming they haven't in the past).

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 5 days ago* (1 child)

    You keep repeating the low credibility but you refuse to read with or engage with WHY they got that rating, and it wasn't for not presenting facts or making shit up, its purely ideological and how they PRESENT facts.

    So how are they PRESENTING this that is making it biased? When they make a full report on it I expect it to be DEEPLY biased, but the video on it's own is very likely real. I'm happy to be proven wrong.

    But I think you just read LOW CREDIBILITY and your brain shuts off and you cant suss out that there's a difference between actually presenting fake journalism and fake stories versus deeply misrepresenting what those facts mean. They got low credibility for BIAS, not FACTS.

    Sorry I bothered to read their fucking reasoning and you won't

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -4 points 5 days ago* (1 child)

    What fact? There is no fact. The footage remains unverified. Not even Snopes could make it out. Seems EXACTLY like they described them -- taking a half-truth and distorting it to a full-lie.

    That you slam your keyboard over and over because someone wants a better source than right-wing slop is wild, so I can only conclude you're a nazi simp.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 5 days ago* (1 child)

    Snopes confirmed the video's authenticity with the videographer who shot it. However, the audio was too distorted to definitively confirm the specifics of the conversation.

    Man you and this conservative media outlet have a lot in common with MISREPRESENTING FACTS

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments