I think it is hard not to come to a snap conclusion one way or the other. We like neatness and simplicity. We need to keep our Bayesian selves alert, that what we are seeing may or may not be true, make some estimation of that likelihood from other clues (What was missing? Did they actually say that the man was trespassing? How likely would this be in your life?) and weight it accordingly.
But that takes energy, energy that we might use for other things.
Is there even a way to distinguish? How do we keep to a middle ground between paranoia and gullibility?
ReplyDeleteI think it is hard not to come to a snap conclusion one way or the other. We like neatness and simplicity. We need to keep our Bayesian selves alert, that what we are seeing may or may not be true, make some estimation of that likelihood from other clues (What was missing? Did they actually say that the man was trespassing? How likely would this be in your life?) and weight it accordingly.
ReplyDeleteBut that takes energy, energy that we might use for other things.
Is AI generated video really that good? Or are a bunch of human actors just claiming to be AI generated?
ReplyDelete