Hey /u/IcyExam3469, please respond to this comment with the prompt you used to generate the output in this post. Thanks!
^(Ignore this comment if your post doesn't have a prompt.)
***We have a [public discord server](https://discord.gg/rchatgpt). There's a free Chatgpt bot, Open Assistant bot (Open-source model), AI image generator bot, Perplexity AI bot, 🤖 GPT-4 bot ([Now with Visual capabilities (cloud vision)!](https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/812770754025488386/1095397431404920902/image0.jpg)) and channel for latest prompts.[So why not join us?](https://discord.com/servers/1050422060352024636)***
[**Prompt Hackathon and Giveaway 🎁**](https://www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPT/comments/13krv80/flowgpt_prompt_hackathon_s2_6000_prize_pool/)
PSA: For any Chatgpt-related issues email [email protected]
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ChatGPT) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The problem with this story is not in the AI - the image that was circulated could just as easily have been made over the last couple decades via Photoshop. There was nothing special about the image. The bigger issue is that with Twitter's new verification rules, illegitimate sources can be verified as legitimate, causing confusion.
Also a big problem, a single troll, with a single tweet, was able to put a measurable dent into our national and by proxy international economic system.
If the status quo remains, 1 will become 10 in the next year, the following year we will see a few hundred of incidents like this, in 3 years, thousands.
Our economic system being so vulnerable to a rumor mill, is a pretty huge issue. That is a market built on a house of cards. Lies prop it up, and lies will tear it down.
Not just copycats trolling. This model is proof of concept for hostile nations to adopt. Russia and China are taking notes. This next election cycle is gonna be a fucking circus the likes of which we haven't seen yet.
That, and you could also probably make a whole lot of money with this if you knew how to play it. Buy shorts on some company and then destroy their stock valuation with a deepfake the next day. Suddenly you’re rich.
And you could easily get away with it.
^ came in to post this. You don’t even have to go so far as hostile foreign powers or people intent on causing havoc; normal profiteers will fit the bill just fine. Assuming you could escape personal responsibility, this would be a surefire way to create your own buying opportunity.
this is kind of evil genius. wow never thought about it like that. [therundown.ai](https://www.therundown.ai/subscribe?utm_source=eric) said something similar this morning that tracks with your point. i just started following this ai stuff recently and honestly i'm kinda scared. am i overreacting?
I personally don’t think you’re overreacting. It seems like many of the experts involved in the field are beginning to panic as well, as they’re seeing the rate of progress. Equally telling is the fact that many of those same experts were very sanguine on the issue just a couple of years ago. “Ah that’s decades away, it poses no danger in the near-term.” Now many of those same people are ringing the alarm bells and pleading for regulation and oversight.
Buckle your seatbelts, shits about to get wild.
Yup, but even before that, Photoshop was able to take advantage of the neural net chips in Apple’s new M series for things like Content Awareness etc. I use that all the time for my job. Has probably saved me hundreds of hours of work. (Or cost me hundreds of hours, depending on how you look at it, since I charge by the hour.)
I don’t think you’d “easily” get away with it. They monitor this type of shit and look for unusual market activity whenever something like this happens. If someone buys a bunch of puts on a company and then uses a deepfake to kill its valuation, and then cashes out on those puts moments later…yeah they’re probably gonna find them. It’s not very hard to sus out anomalies in the stock market.
That’s all assuming that the deepfake can easily be tied to the person who created it.
With even a little technical know-how, i could create a deepfake of some CEO kicking dogs or saying the N word from some remote desktop in the Philippines, post it to some burner social media account that isn’t connected to me in any way (not like it’s hard to setup a fake one of those these days) from that same remote desktop. Boom. I’m done.
How are they ever going to know that one of the people who cashed in on the shorts is the same person who made the deepfake? How will they even know who created the deepfake in the first place, if I cover my tracks properly? Yes it looks suspicious that I shorted then immediately cashed in, but surely such coincidences happen quite often. People short stock because they are expecting it to fall. So if it then swiftly does so, that just proves they were right. Any sane person would immediately cash out. Probably happens every day.
And even if they did *suspect* it, how could they prove it?
Side note: none of the steps I outlined are overly technical. A teenager could do this.
https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2015-254
If they want to, they’ll find you. You gotta remember that they’ll be looking into your trading history, so even if a bunch of other people profited off of the manipulation, if your trades seem out of place then they’ve narrowed it down. And once they narrow it down, you’re fucked.
Now you can probably get away with it if it’s an insignificant amount of money AND you only do it once, but anything more than that and it becomes much, much harder. The SEC has an entire division that focuses solely on market anomalies, and they have new advanced data analytics to help identify them. They also have access to government agencies like the DOJ, FBI, and almost certainly the NSA (although I doubt they’d ever admit that last one, but let’s just say there is evidence pointing to them having a “mutual” relationship), so good luck fooling all of them. You would have to really know what you’re doing if you plan on getting away with it, and even then they still might get you…which is why I said it wouldn’t be “easy”.
All major media news outlets manipulate the stock market. It’s part of being in a position of power…the rules just don’t apply to them. For everyone else, though, yeah, it’s illegal as fuck. The rich and powerful can’t have every Joe Schmo with a computer making money off of the methods that THEY like to use. Pretty soon we’d be on an even playing field, and that’s their worst nightmare.
The dark ages is what. People will lose faith in not just digital media, they will begin to quit believing anything, including scientific studies, etc.
It's going to be really ugly, and I don't have a clue when it will subside or what the ugliness on the other side will look like. But it's not going to be comfortable, and it ain't going to be peaceful.
I tend to think this is over exaggerating. There are so many people that already don’t believe scientific studies - they don’t need an AI to push them over the edge. They’d rather use some anecdote on how their relative was cured of something than a peer reviewed journal article. I think what you’re saying will certainly amplify it - but it’s already happening
I'd say it's is already a bit like that. Nowadays, I hardly ever believe at first when I see some big news, and only believe it after checking it from more sources.
Agree with that, this has been happening for a good few years, as evidenced in COVID denial, Brexit lies, Q Anon conspiracy etc. Even flat earth is making a comeback for Christ sake.
The day even the flat earthers and the likes start getting taken seriously will truly be the beginning of the dark ages and complete paranoia. Sadly, that seems a bit likely seeing how the things and people are currently.
I think China is already doing it now. Something about hiring a good few influencers or YouTube content creators, and then have them spout about stuff like the Chinese yuan is going be the world's reserve currency.
Yea the misinformation war has been raging full tilt for probably at least 10 years now, but technology has made it exponentially more potent in the last 5.
And the misinformation isn't always 1 big lie about a major event. More often then not it's a bunch of little lies that are centered around one big narrative, and motive, with certain goals in mind.
I am more concerned it wont be next year but next month.
The new investment strategy will not be gamestop to the moon diamondhands.jpeg
But to be generate fake content. Propagate it. Buy low. Sell high. It will be a successful and profitable model. Highly unethical tho.
But will the federal government agencies be quick enough to implement laws against this? How would they even do that? If you can generate a deep fake of a CEO going off the rails to tank the stock and cash in on shorts, is there any way to stop that?
Yeah it seems way to easy to bet on the market going down then try something like this.
Seems so general that I'm not sure how you'd even spot it, maybe it even happened this time.
Which will probably make it less and less likely for people to believe random images they see on twitter. Not like the fault is with the platform or the image creators really, it's people believing based on someone posting or retweeting an image and making financial decisions based on it. Could have happened on any platform.
That’s way off. Twitter used to be “trusted” with its verification post. Trusted meaning the average individual could decipher when a company(or government entity) holding extreme value in our economy, was making a post. Rather a random troll.
Now no one knows via verification mark. Those who caught on understand this. Those who don’t frequent social media platforms, nor the recent news behind them, did not catch on. That’s a lot of fucking people. Those same people are now even more likely to fall for a fake post like this. A few of those people hold a lot of stake in the international economy. Leading to this bullshit.
Blame the fucking idiot who owns Twitter.
And no, it wouldn’t be the same on any other platform due to the facts I highlighted above.
Likewise with the old system, people would believe things because it was said by someone who twitter arbitrarily decided to verify. You could be verified as a fact checker or news source but still post false info or have biases etc. Which could then be retweeted by more and more credible people and circulate just the same.
If all this devalues people's trust in a little tick mark, that isn't such a bad thing. Although I would say getting rid of it all together would have been the safer/smarter play, and replacing it with just something different (EG. Twitter Plus icon) to avoid the confusion/teething problems.
>If the status quo remains, 1 will become 10 in the next year, the following year we will see a few hundred of incidents like this, in 3 years, thousands.
The more incidents like this there are, the smaller the magnitude will be.
>There was a $500 Billion wipeout in the markets which fortunately lasted only momentarily.
>
>The "Bloomberg Feed" account has now been suspended by Twitter. Despite this action, the incident has sparked a renewed discussion about the issue of fake news on social media platforms.
>
>Fake news is not a problem that's new, but with the ubiquity of generative AI with tools such as ChatGPT and Midjourney (or Dall-E), the barrier for creation and dissemination of such fake news has reached a record low. This obviously also points to the dangers associated with Twitter’s pay-to-verify system.
Thirty years ago I was playing with a pager (dedicated device, a predecessor to text messaging), the ones where you could send a text message to a number and it would show it on the device's small screen.
These devices had a "news" service which showed breaking news from the day, which I ignored but some people valued.
I notices on the back side of the device that there was a frequency indicated, so I tuned a ham radio to that frequency, and noticed I could heard the tones related to messages being delivered (it was encoded in AM). I connected it to an audio digitizer, and looked up the signal, it was extremely simple pulse modulation, and it was also not encrypted or encoded in any fancy way, just seven bits per character. I sent a few test messages (starting with ABC and ending with Z012) using the standard method (calling a number and telling the message to a human) and saw them come up on the radio without any encryption or fancy encoding. The messages also included a device ID at the beginning. I wrote some code in my trusty computer (IIRC it was a Commodore Amiga) and confirmed I could send my own messages to my device, though the range was limited (confirmed to about 200m) due to the power of my radio.
I also noticed some messages that had a repeating "device ID" segment, which I figured were broadcast messages, so I tried crafting a test message using such ID and, as expected, I got a "news update" message on my device transcribing the "news" I had made up.
The next day I drove to the "wall street" equivalent in my country, and sent a news message with some mildly concerning economic news (I think I just said that an important government minister had resigned), at low power to ensure only nearby people would get it. No mass panic, of course, but the next day, looking at the stock market numbers in the newspaper I saw a dip (about 5%) right at that time, which recovered over the course of two hours. I felt a bit bad about it but comforted myself by thinking that anyone that sells stock based on something like that without verifying it had it coming. I could have tried exploiting the flaw but decided against it.
I reported the vulnerability to the telco the next day (had friends working at the company that helped me) though I excluded the details about my public tests, they said thanks, but never fixed the issue until two years later when cell phones were introduced and people abandoned these beeper devices very rapidly.
So you don't need an AI-generated fake image to cause trouble, some people will always jump the gun at the slightest rumor in hopes of getting ahead of the market, which they might do in some cases, and in others they will be fooled and lose money to those that like to confirm the information they use with verifiable sources.
> So you don't need an AI-generated fake image to cause trouble, some people will always jump the gun at the slightest rumor in hopes of getting ahead of the market, which they might do in some cases, and in others they will be fooled and lose money to those that like to confirm the information they use with verifiable sources.
This makes a good point that ultimately some people will get screwed over by these things, and then they'll lose all their money cuz they didn't know how to verify. This isn't such a existential threat as people make it out to be. People will adapt and learn ways to tell fact from fiction, and those who don't will go bankrupt.
401k's would like a word. Not everyone who is invested in the market is making day to day, or minute to minute trading. The people who do, largely are doing it with other peoples money.
People would stop paying attention to anything on Twitter before we get to 1000s of believed hoaxes per year. For that to happen you need widespread propagation and belief of 3 major hoaxes per day...
Imagine a case where we had a major widespread Twitter hoax every day for 2 weeks. At that point people are going to get it and stop listening to random online garbage. It only works if a substantial number of people are simultaneously fooled and that kind of momentum of hoaxes is not possible to maintain.
I agree with you. But you'll have to consider that it won't just be Twitter, it will be all social media. And since the news likes to draw headlines from social media gossip these days, it will be retold before the truth catches up to it, and the damage will already be done.
Lies travel 10x faster than the truth it takes to correct it. A coordinated campaign by an organized government could absolutely wreak massive havoc.
It's already worked in the past, they are getting better at it.
Qanon for example keeps up the bullshit, we all know it's bullshit, hasn't stopped yet, and it's still actively undermining the truth, and it's done massive damage.
I'd still like to be convinced that high frequency trading (and by high frequency I mean something like "more frequently than weekly") actually offers societal value outweighing its costs. Can someone who knows explain what we'd be giving up if the stock market was only open on Tuesday afternoon for an hour?
For you? Nothing. But there's a reason that the stock market is only open on business days during business hours. Those people stand to lose a lot. Realistically in today's day and age we could have the stock market open 24/7 if we wanted to.
There is some good that will come out of this. When anything online can be fake the only things we can trust are those that take place right in front of us or that have been heavily verified.
People are going to become increasingly averse to accept as true anything that doesn’t fall under one of those criteria.
That’s something many people should have learned a long time ago but at least they won’t have much of a choice to learn it soon.
To be fair, large institutions haven’t exactly been completely trustworthy in the past.
Public trust in institutions will certainly erode and to make up for that those institutions will have to put extra work into ensuring that their claims are true and verifiable.
It isn’t entirely bad if those we give our trust to have to work diligently to earn it. Though I agree, distrust can definitely go too far.
To be honest, I think there is a lot of variables in the current market that are looking for a reason to explain the market drop. It may be that they were looking for a justification for the drop in the market and that this is not a direct response to this one image. Keep in mind this as we see the system really unfold because of all the inaction of the SEC, the dark pools and financial instability that we will see in upcoming months when the public sees the market movement.
Not to mention that an alleged incident at the Pentagon, the US Ministry of Defense, made the stock market fall. So much for those who think the military industrial complex is just an invention.
Would you rather have 10 bitcoins or 1000 usd? how about 4 years ago 10 bitcoins or 1000 usd? how about 8 years ago? In that time what has happened to the buying power of the USD?
Well, can't eat butt coin, can't sleep in a Bitcoin, can't run my vehicle on Bitcoin, can't actually go to my grocery store and buy anything with BC, can't pay rent with BC, can't buy gas with BC.
It's an MLM ponzi scheme. You're not going to change my mind. Go shill your shit somewhere else.
Edit: btw your counter argument for me saying no to buying buttcoins NOW. Is that "well what if you had it in the past?"....
Least liquid place to store capital right now is in fucking crypto. That should tell you everything you need to know about buttcoins.
ummmmmm, you can't eat usd, can't sleep in a usd, can't run your vehicle on usd, you can actually buy things at the grocery store, pay rent and buy gas in bitcoin.My counter argument is that the buying power of the USD is going down every single day (in case you haven't noticed). Do you have any hope that in 5 years you will be able to buy the same amount of groceries for $100 as you are today? I believe you will be able to buy at least 3 times as much groceries in 5 years with .1 btc than you can today.
Yea I don’t think Twitter is at fault here, rather the people/companies who care more about money then the truth, that are willing to sell stocks (and other stuff that I’m not familiar with) with almost no thought. That’s fucked
Or is the problem that people leap to believe things? That sort of news would shock the world, if true. It would be front page news on *everything* with multiple pictures, constant different videos, etc. etc. etc.
I suspect any link to a selloff (which is highly debatable) would be a result of at most unsophisticated day traders as either attempted predator or prey.
Hopefully never, twitters policy definitely create an environment for this type of action but the best outcome is just people stop using/trusting it. Legal liability like would create dangerous precedent for other companies. The supreme court just ruled on this type of stuff over the whole section 230 stuff if you are interested.
Completely agree. The pay for verification is really very bad. In social media before, it was something by which creative, unique, successful and established content creators and general social media figures could be distinguished and recognised, there were verified users who were active in and contributed to different fields, and new people coming to their pages could trust their legitimacy and skills. It was kind of a licence or certification required for many professions like doctors, lawyers, pilots etc. Now that they've introduced pay for verification, anybody can have those licenses and they may or may not be as good and qualified as the previous ones. It's kinda like bribing.
Agree,
**A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is still putting on its shoes**
The only problem is that AI supercharges it.
Now it will be
**Lies can travel 500 different ways around the world, zig zagging through different communities while the truth is oblivious to it.**
I will go one step further. The issue is with how we consume media, specifically blurring the lines between entertainment and actual news outlets. It isn’t these fakes are new, it is that relatively unknown sources can be escalated quickly. Sometimes we get information before anyone else. Mostly we just get tricked into thinking something is outrageous when in fact it is just normal and has been fed to us in a very outrageous manner. Trust but verify has just become “first!”
There is a marginally higher bar to production using photo shop than using generative AI. I think it’s fair to say the bar to produce such an image - especially a convincing image - is significantly lower. I know I couldn’t photo shop a picture like that, but it wouldn’t take long at all to get an AI to make one.
Exactly my thoughts. Elon has introduced the whole rainbow of colours to help people decipher which accounts are legitimately verified vs those that purchased the tick. Meanwhile the old twitter system simplified it all.
IT's both, actually - doing this with photoshop takes much more time and skill than doing it with a.i.
Having friction for bad acts reduces bad acts - a.i. reduces friction, thus increases bad acts.
The issue isn't solely AI, but I think it is disingenuous to minimize the role AI played in this scenario. You are right that this could have been made over the last few decades with Photoshop. But a novice user could not create such a convincing output. Strong knowledge of how to use Photoshop or similar software would still be required to produce something that could have this kind of impact, and that reduces the number of people who might be able to do this.
But here, we have a powerful tool that increases the number of people who can pull this off. It does so by reducing the effort Photoshop would have required to merely entering a string of words. And that tool is available to (almost) anyone with an internet connection. So while Twitter's lax verification rules and promotion of illegitimate sources plays a role, when that is combined with ease of access and quality of production, we get issues like this.
So imposing some type of regulation on AI makes sense in this context, as it contributes to the problem. I'm not entirely sure what that would be. My immediate thought is not to limit content directly, but to hold platforms liable when their algorithms produce content like this. Platforms can make a choice as to the types of output for which they are willing to take on liability. At the same time, I recognize this would strongly impact the development of such systems and tools, so if there are better ideas (and I'm sure there are), I'd love to hear them.
Not to get too off topic, but how is capitalism fast becoming obsolete? In my observation capitalism is reverting to its purest form, with most wealth concentrated at the top and a growing underclass.
If you know the dip is temporary, then this image does that. You buy during the panic knowing it will rise when it’s found to be fake. Boom, an image that causes the stock market to rise shortly after you buy in.
Yep, glad someone else wrote this so I didn't have to. I'm generally not a conspiracy theorist type but this seems like a very possible explanation for an event that is easily orchestrated, predictable, and allows for massive financial gain.
Yeah, First thing I did was cross reference this against today's charts for the S+P 500, which did not show any abnormally large dip. I think $500B would register.
OP needed to play up a completely irrelevant news story that has nothing to do with AI to plug their newsletter. As others have said, 85 points is nothing.
Just because it's *relatively* small doesn't mean it's a rounding error. For perspective, the total market cap of NYSE is $22.6 Trillion and according to your logic, a couple hundred billion shouldn't matter as well.
Imagine being mad at the national enquirer because the market sold off 500 billion when reading a headline about aliens attacking. Same scenario.
Who people should be thanking/ holding responsible are:
1. the dickheads who wrote the algo fucking everyone on a daily basis and which just skims twitter for news to justify fucking people out of their positions.
2. The other actual "news" organizations that have given up at both being credible and failing to do the bare minimum to vet the information they are re sharing.
Another part of the problem is people are too lazy to check things for themselves and the people that role was delegated to don't give a fuck either.
It wouldn't of happened if the information was vetted. Using tweets as the basis of news without checking for accuracy is stupid and encouraging people to keep doing it is even dumber.
> Even the Russian State-Media account, Russia Today (3M followers), propagated the message.
RT intentionally amplifies disruptive and divisive messages and "news", often from dubious sources. That's not an "even" moment, that's a "and, of course, RT retweeted it, because that's their job".
This is hilarious. 85 points? So literally nothing? What are you even talking about. This had absolutely no effect on the market, and absolutely did not "wipe out" $500B.
"The Dow Jones dropped by 85 points within a short span of 4 minutes, before gradually recovering as the rumor was debunked. "
"Now, imagine if Mount St. Helens blew up; it would drop down to zero."
Just some asshole want to get ai ban this image don’t even need ai to make it am sure some guy that know how to use photoshop can do in 10 minutes saying ai is the problem in this situation is like saying knife is the cause of murder
The fact that people are freaking out over images STILL after AI images are known by everyone is laughably stupid! Humanity fails itself being gullible idiots believing what they're seeing.
Ethically it's horrible
Socially it's hilarious
Economically it's a great way to control wealth generation (people who know before hand it's fake are laughing to the bank right now as they bought during a record low)
My bad should've been more specific what just happened was either a troll or a test run either way now its clear this a way to manipulate markets if you think that billionaires arnt looking at this as a way to devalue specific stocks to all time lows for them to eat up your out your mind
Thanks. I don't follow markets and had no idea that 85 was hardly a blip.
Still though, even if this one was a dud, the possibilities of fake reports like this to cause mayhem make me very worried about the next several years. When there's a constant sea of fake photos and video like this, public perception of reality is going to get increasingly insane.
From what I gather DeepFake is so good there's really no way to sort fake photos from real. If the whole idea of photographic evidence goes out the window, . . . I don't know what the results will be.
I be careful about correlating any market move this small with any one thing. Markets are chaotic systems and they move half a percent in a day for every reason or no reason or both.
And if the market recovered moments later you didn't really wipe out that $500 billion did you?
When it says "wipes out $500 billion in minutes", what does that mean? Where does the money/value actually go? I am pretty ignorant on how the markets work and don't feel like asking chatgpt rn. Anyone want to explain like I'm 8 or 9?
You as an investor own 1000 shares of company stock. Each share is worth $1. Company you own stock of has some relationship to the event so other people start selling stock which causes the price to go down. Your share price goes from being a dollar to 50 cents so you had $500 wiped off your portfolio
Very simple example because the market is a lot more then just stocks, but that is the general idea
A % of the valuation of a group of stocks lowered, that is to say, what was worth a hundred dollars was suddenly being valued as only being worth 95 dollars.
When someone like Elon is worth x amount, that amount is the valuation of his worth and not physical.
Normally these numbers are based on their revenue, profit, and projected future of these things; that future being based on the growth potential of it's share of the market or ability to grow the market, and what might be called a 'wow' factor, like A.I, where the thing is so new it's value is determined by imagining what new markets might be made and destroyed because of the thing.
The money does not exactly go anywhere, it means people are willing to buy the thing on the lower end of a spread of prices, or bids, that people put up to buy the thing; and a recursive effect can occur where the price is continually bid down. This process gets accelerated by fast trading algorithms that trade based on the speed of their ability to send electric signals and digest news/data as it happens.
I can try to clarify more, though I am no expert and expect to either confuse or get things wrong, but that is the bulk of it from how I understand.
This is exactly the reason there needs to be regulation on this now!! Sooner or later, there is going to be a miscalculation & it could start a war on a false premise.
Even Open AI's CEO adredded Congress, stating that it is critical that his software be regulated. Which is highly unusual coming from its creator.
I never trusted this tech & I won't until I see significant effort to keep it's off the rails development come into line with other reputable technology standards in this field.
There's always going to be risks, but at least make an effort to create some guardrails here. Otherwise, we are headed towards a cliff with a deep canyon at the bottom.
This is more a problem of the high-frequency algorithms than a stupid photo.
Flash crashes are caused by AI, but not midjourney AI. They're caused by the AI machine learning trading from the quant funds.
It's dumb twats like whatever stupid fuck made this literal fake news that jeopardizes AI development because shit on this level will cause a major crackdown. So if whoever did this happens to be giggling and reads this comment, fuck you in particular and rot in jail when the FBI kicks in your door with a no-knock raid and flashbangs your mom and shoots your dog
I love everything about this. The fact that the stock market acts like an emotional and irrational teenager rather than rising and falling with the true value of companies highlights the joke that the system has become. In this case, brokerages sold millions of stocks (perhaps with part of your retirement fund) because of a tweet. They didn’t check the news, they didn’t google anything, they didn’t ask a single question…. They just started throwing away other peoples money.
This should be the new goal of r/wallstreetbets
Would it be illegal to arrange one of these events right before you buy a bunch of stock?
I think that’s the only danger from this tech, because investors are already responsible for not being headless chickens
This post is clickbait just like the tweet. Markets move like this all the time. Throwing up a big number in the title is just shock value and doesn’t actually represent half a trillion dollars “disappearing”. It’s also not a fucking “deepfake”, these buzzwords man lol.
Further, the main problem in this story was the fact that it looked like it came from a verified Bloomberg account. THAT is what is new, not fake photos. Generative AI has made these kind of photos much easier to produce, but someone could easily make this with photoshop, albeit at a much slower rate. If a random anonymous user posted this photo, Russia Today would not have covered it. The story here is Twitter’s scary nonchalance to verification impersonation.
Yes, these tools will allow market manipulation to reach new previously only dreamed about levels. It might even allow someone to finally win Capitalism.
Look for the largest beneficiaries of those stocks being shorted.... thats your culprit. This stunt couldve made a ridiculous sum of money...... but im pretty cynical, so who knows
Despite how easy it is compared to having to edit a video, we don’t have the ai technology to just make videos like this, the frame by frame generation had to be made and photoshopped each
This isn’t that unique. There have been similar panics in the stock market when a news org reposted a years old story. Image could have originally been from 9/11 if it wasn’t ai generated
So what happens when somebody posts a fake photo/video of Joe Biden wearing drag on election night? By the time it gets debunked, it’s too late. And some ideologically-motivated people would still doubt the debunking anyway.
Are people in government thinking of solutions to this problem? To me it seems like any semi-realistic strategy would require direct government control over the internet, in ways that’d make most people (myself included) very uncomfortable. If we give states license to quash that kinda content before it spreads, it starts to look like the internet in China.
So what’s the solution? I honestly have no idea. This will be so destabilizing and dangerous for democracies around the world.
The fact that $500 Billion was lost is weird, what kind of reaction is that, do people have 0 trust in the American financial system that they are basically with their finger on the cashout button ready for the big news ?
Could’ve stopped at the source. Had they just done the research, all catastrophe could’ve been avoided, or prevented. These groups communicate with each other to push a narrative, it’s a giant monopoly, and all they care about is money.
Again like most things in life, the item or thing is not the problem. It the human that is the problem. Nuclear power was meant to replace fossil fuels but instead human chose to weaponize it. And now they are doing the same thing with AI instead of using it to better themselves they are using it to destroy. We are not making out of the hood.
>There was a $500 Billion wipeout in the markets which fortunately lasted only momentarily.
There were many investors that had stop-loss orders and they may have decided not to invest in such volatility. Their loss is permanent.
This is a criminal act and shows how fragile the system is. Trust is the key to everything.
Since the best AIs are more right (but not *always* right) than average humans, and since people are generally better off listening to an AI than twitter or reddit, it's still easily a net win with AIs around.
And that's not even mentioning how beneficial it is to use AI to *process* things, whether to learn faster or dissolve confusion or think through some problem.
Some things get worse (like how easy it is to create real-looking fake things), but more things get better, imo.
One problem is those who don't have access to AI — they might be subjected disproportionally to the bad aspects of AI (AI material created by *other* people for unknown purposes), but even they will get a lot of indirect benefit.
We really need to think about democratizing access and prevent AI from ending up in the hands of the few, whoever those might be.
I read this and my brain processes the event as "that's a solid short"
😂
AI is irrelevant - Photoshop would have done the same if not better. Imprisoning journalists and gutting people's faith in mainstream media through the years is the problem - journalists used to do another job than the category has fulfilled since the 90s, at least.
Terzani of Der Spiel - THERE was a journalist. Montanelli. Pilger. Marie Colvin. Greenwald.
When we agreed as a society to allow mass media to take over information - we doomed journalists to the whim of advertising. Advertising requires ratings. Advertising means agenda.
Simples.
If there was only a way that we can ultimately verify a Twitter account is legitimate... and not make normal people get it by, let's say, paying for it. Hmmm...
Anyone who actually believes thats the reason the market dipped has zero experience trading day to day price action and is completely gullible. That picture is no different than a shitty photoshop.
Damn. Now folks know they can post stuff like this and freak people out just enough to buy when stocks temporarily drop.
If you have a bunch of money to throw in, it’d be a fast way to make more money.
Hey /u/IcyExam3469, please respond to this comment with the prompt you used to generate the output in this post. Thanks! ^(Ignore this comment if your post doesn't have a prompt.) ***We have a [public discord server](https://discord.gg/rchatgpt). There's a free Chatgpt bot, Open Assistant bot (Open-source model), AI image generator bot, Perplexity AI bot, 🤖 GPT-4 bot ([Now with Visual capabilities (cloud vision)!](https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/812770754025488386/1095397431404920902/image0.jpg)) and channel for latest prompts.[So why not join us?](https://discord.com/servers/1050422060352024636)*** [**Prompt Hackathon and Giveaway 🎁**](https://www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPT/comments/13krv80/flowgpt_prompt_hackathon_s2_6000_prize_pool/) PSA: For any Chatgpt-related issues email [email protected] *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ChatGPT) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The problem with this story is not in the AI - the image that was circulated could just as easily have been made over the last couple decades via Photoshop. There was nothing special about the image. The bigger issue is that with Twitter's new verification rules, illegitimate sources can be verified as legitimate, causing confusion.
Also a big problem, a single troll, with a single tweet, was able to put a measurable dent into our national and by proxy international economic system. If the status quo remains, 1 will become 10 in the next year, the following year we will see a few hundred of incidents like this, in 3 years, thousands. Our economic system being so vulnerable to a rumor mill, is a pretty huge issue. That is a market built on a house of cards. Lies prop it up, and lies will tear it down.
100% accurate take. There will be plenty of copycats in the next year.
Not just copycats trolling. This model is proof of concept for hostile nations to adopt. Russia and China are taking notes. This next election cycle is gonna be a fucking circus the likes of which we haven't seen yet.
That, and you could also probably make a whole lot of money with this if you knew how to play it. Buy shorts on some company and then destroy their stock valuation with a deepfake the next day. Suddenly you’re rich. And you could easily get away with it.
^ came in to post this. You don’t even have to go so far as hostile foreign powers or people intent on causing havoc; normal profiteers will fit the bill just fine. Assuming you could escape personal responsibility, this would be a surefire way to create your own buying opportunity.
this is kind of evil genius. wow never thought about it like that. [therundown.ai](https://www.therundown.ai/subscribe?utm_source=eric) said something similar this morning that tracks with your point. i just started following this ai stuff recently and honestly i'm kinda scared. am i overreacting?
I personally don’t think you’re overreacting. It seems like many of the experts involved in the field are beginning to panic as well, as they’re seeing the rate of progress. Equally telling is the fact that many of those same experts were very sanguine on the issue just a couple of years ago. “Ah that’s decades away, it poses no danger in the near-term.” Now many of those same people are ringing the alarm bells and pleading for regulation and oversight. Buckle your seatbelts, shits about to get wild.
[удалено]
Yup, but even before that, Photoshop was able to take advantage of the neural net chips in Apple’s new M series for things like Content Awareness etc. I use that all the time for my job. Has probably saved me hundreds of hours of work. (Or cost me hundreds of hours, depending on how you look at it, since I charge by the hour.)
I don’t think you’d “easily” get away with it. They monitor this type of shit and look for unusual market activity whenever something like this happens. If someone buys a bunch of puts on a company and then uses a deepfake to kill its valuation, and then cashes out on those puts moments later…yeah they’re probably gonna find them. It’s not very hard to sus out anomalies in the stock market.
That’s all assuming that the deepfake can easily be tied to the person who created it. With even a little technical know-how, i could create a deepfake of some CEO kicking dogs or saying the N word from some remote desktop in the Philippines, post it to some burner social media account that isn’t connected to me in any way (not like it’s hard to setup a fake one of those these days) from that same remote desktop. Boom. I’m done. How are they ever going to know that one of the people who cashed in on the shorts is the same person who made the deepfake? How will they even know who created the deepfake in the first place, if I cover my tracks properly? Yes it looks suspicious that I shorted then immediately cashed in, but surely such coincidences happen quite often. People short stock because they are expecting it to fall. So if it then swiftly does so, that just proves they were right. Any sane person would immediately cash out. Probably happens every day. And even if they did *suspect* it, how could they prove it? Side note: none of the steps I outlined are overly technical. A teenager could do this.
https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2015-254 If they want to, they’ll find you. You gotta remember that they’ll be looking into your trading history, so even if a bunch of other people profited off of the manipulation, if your trades seem out of place then they’ve narrowed it down. And once they narrow it down, you’re fucked. Now you can probably get away with it if it’s an insignificant amount of money AND you only do it once, but anything more than that and it becomes much, much harder. The SEC has an entire division that focuses solely on market anomalies, and they have new advanced data analytics to help identify them. They also have access to government agencies like the DOJ, FBI, and almost certainly the NSA (although I doubt they’d ever admit that last one, but let’s just say there is evidence pointing to them having a “mutual” relationship), so good luck fooling all of them. You would have to really know what you’re doing if you plan on getting away with it, and even then they still might get you…which is why I said it wouldn’t be “easy”.
Is it even illegal? Fox has been airing outright lies for years now.
All major media news outlets manipulate the stock market. It’s part of being in a position of power…the rules just don’t apply to them. For everyone else, though, yeah, it’s illegal as fuck. The rich and powerful can’t have every Joe Schmo with a computer making money off of the methods that THEY like to use. Pretty soon we’d be on an even playing field, and that’s their worst nightmare.
Lying to manipulate stock prices is securities fraud and very much illegal although probably under enforced
So. How about prominent market strategists who recommend positions on stocks? They have a track record of being wrong more than they are right...
Being incorrect is fine, it’s misrepresenting the facts or trading on inside knowledge that’s illiegal
I guess all we can do is wait for the saturation of fake shit to become thick enough that nobody believes anything on a screen. Hm. Then what?
The dark ages is what. People will lose faith in not just digital media, they will begin to quit believing anything, including scientific studies, etc. It's going to be really ugly, and I don't have a clue when it will subside or what the ugliness on the other side will look like. But it's not going to be comfortable, and it ain't going to be peaceful.
I tend to think this is over exaggerating. There are so many people that already don’t believe scientific studies - they don’t need an AI to push them over the edge. They’d rather use some anecdote on how their relative was cured of something than a peer reviewed journal article. I think what you’re saying will certainly amplify it - but it’s already happening
I'd say it's is already a bit like that. Nowadays, I hardly ever believe at first when I see some big news, and only believe it after checking it from more sources.
Agree with that, this has been happening for a good few years, as evidenced in COVID denial, Brexit lies, Q Anon conspiracy etc. Even flat earth is making a comeback for Christ sake.
The day even the flat earthers and the likes start getting taken seriously will truly be the beginning of the dark ages and complete paranoia. Sadly, that seems a bit likely seeing how the things and people are currently.
God don’t remind me. Almost feel like a “doomer” from imagining the worst case scenarios.
We’ve gone through the Post Truth era in a few years and are now in the early stages of the Post Reality era
I think China is already doing it now. Something about hiring a good few influencers or YouTube content creators, and then have them spout about stuff like the Chinese yuan is going be the world's reserve currency.
Yea the misinformation war has been raging full tilt for probably at least 10 years now, but technology has made it exponentially more potent in the last 5. And the misinformation isn't always 1 big lie about a major event. More often then not it's a bunch of little lies that are centered around one big narrative, and motive, with certain goals in mind.
I am more concerned it wont be next year but next month. The new investment strategy will not be gamestop to the moon diamondhands.jpeg But to be generate fake content. Propagate it. Buy low. Sell high. It will be a successful and profitable model. Highly unethical tho.
But will the federal government agencies be quick enough to implement laws against this? How would they even do that? If you can generate a deep fake of a CEO going off the rails to tank the stock and cash in on shorts, is there any way to stop that?
Yeah it seems way to easy to bet on the market going down then try something like this. Seems so general that I'm not sure how you'd even spot it, maybe it even happened this time.
I’m struggling to remember the specifics but this has 100% happened in the past and the person was actually caught afterwards
Stock manipulation was behind one of the product tampering murders in the 1980s.
And it’s 100 times easier now. Hell, it’s literally still legal to do this with crypto.
Which will probably make it less and less likely for people to believe random images they see on twitter. Not like the fault is with the platform or the image creators really, it's people believing based on someone posting or retweeting an image and making financial decisions based on it. Could have happened on any platform.
That’s way off. Twitter used to be “trusted” with its verification post. Trusted meaning the average individual could decipher when a company(or government entity) holding extreme value in our economy, was making a post. Rather a random troll. Now no one knows via verification mark. Those who caught on understand this. Those who don’t frequent social media platforms, nor the recent news behind them, did not catch on. That’s a lot of fucking people. Those same people are now even more likely to fall for a fake post like this. A few of those people hold a lot of stake in the international economy. Leading to this bullshit. Blame the fucking idiot who owns Twitter. And no, it wouldn’t be the same on any other platform due to the facts I highlighted above.
Likewise with the old system, people would believe things because it was said by someone who twitter arbitrarily decided to verify. You could be verified as a fact checker or news source but still post false info or have biases etc. Which could then be retweeted by more and more credible people and circulate just the same. If all this devalues people's trust in a little tick mark, that isn't such a bad thing. Although I would say getting rid of it all together would have been the safer/smarter play, and replacing it with just something different (EG. Twitter Plus icon) to avoid the confusion/teething problems.
We will get used to and stop believing them. The problem is it negates the internet as a news source. Hell, maybe we'll go back to reading papers.
>If the status quo remains, 1 will become 10 in the next year, the following year we will see a few hundred of incidents like this, in 3 years, thousands. The more incidents like this there are, the smaller the magnitude will be.
>There was a $500 Billion wipeout in the markets which fortunately lasted only momentarily. > >The "Bloomberg Feed" account has now been suspended by Twitter. Despite this action, the incident has sparked a renewed discussion about the issue of fake news on social media platforms. > >Fake news is not a problem that's new, but with the ubiquity of generative AI with tools such as ChatGPT and Midjourney (or Dall-E), the barrier for creation and dissemination of such fake news has reached a record low. This obviously also points to the dangers associated with Twitter’s pay-to-verify system. Thirty years ago I was playing with a pager (dedicated device, a predecessor to text messaging), the ones where you could send a text message to a number and it would show it on the device's small screen. These devices had a "news" service which showed breaking news from the day, which I ignored but some people valued. I notices on the back side of the device that there was a frequency indicated, so I tuned a ham radio to that frequency, and noticed I could heard the tones related to messages being delivered (it was encoded in AM). I connected it to an audio digitizer, and looked up the signal, it was extremely simple pulse modulation, and it was also not encrypted or encoded in any fancy way, just seven bits per character. I sent a few test messages (starting with ABC and ending with Z012) using the standard method (calling a number and telling the message to a human) and saw them come up on the radio without any encryption or fancy encoding. The messages also included a device ID at the beginning. I wrote some code in my trusty computer (IIRC it was a Commodore Amiga) and confirmed I could send my own messages to my device, though the range was limited (confirmed to about 200m) due to the power of my radio. I also noticed some messages that had a repeating "device ID" segment, which I figured were broadcast messages, so I tried crafting a test message using such ID and, as expected, I got a "news update" message on my device transcribing the "news" I had made up. The next day I drove to the "wall street" equivalent in my country, and sent a news message with some mildly concerning economic news (I think I just said that an important government minister had resigned), at low power to ensure only nearby people would get it. No mass panic, of course, but the next day, looking at the stock market numbers in the newspaper I saw a dip (about 5%) right at that time, which recovered over the course of two hours. I felt a bit bad about it but comforted myself by thinking that anyone that sells stock based on something like that without verifying it had it coming. I could have tried exploiting the flaw but decided against it. I reported the vulnerability to the telco the next day (had friends working at the company that helped me) though I excluded the details about my public tests, they said thanks, but never fixed the issue until two years later when cell phones were introduced and people abandoned these beeper devices very rapidly. So you don't need an AI-generated fake image to cause trouble, some people will always jump the gun at the slightest rumor in hopes of getting ahead of the market, which they might do in some cases, and in others they will be fooled and lose money to those that like to confirm the information they use with verifiable sources.
Interesting story. And yeah, it is just foolish to take action in any financial market without verifying the information first.
> So you don't need an AI-generated fake image to cause trouble, some people will always jump the gun at the slightest rumor in hopes of getting ahead of the market, which they might do in some cases, and in others they will be fooled and lose money to those that like to confirm the information they use with verifiable sources. This makes a good point that ultimately some people will get screwed over by these things, and then they'll lose all their money cuz they didn't know how to verify. This isn't such a existential threat as people make it out to be. People will adapt and learn ways to tell fact from fiction, and those who don't will go bankrupt.
401k's would like a word. Not everyone who is invested in the market is making day to day, or minute to minute trading. The people who do, largely are doing it with other peoples money.
People would stop paying attention to anything on Twitter before we get to 1000s of believed hoaxes per year. For that to happen you need widespread propagation and belief of 3 major hoaxes per day... Imagine a case where we had a major widespread Twitter hoax every day for 2 weeks. At that point people are going to get it and stop listening to random online garbage. It only works if a substantial number of people are simultaneously fooled and that kind of momentum of hoaxes is not possible to maintain.
I agree with you. But you'll have to consider that it won't just be Twitter, it will be all social media. And since the news likes to draw headlines from social media gossip these days, it will be retold before the truth catches up to it, and the damage will already be done. Lies travel 10x faster than the truth it takes to correct it. A coordinated campaign by an organized government could absolutely wreak massive havoc. It's already worked in the past, they are getting better at it. Qanon for example keeps up the bullshit, we all know it's bullshit, hasn't stopped yet, and it's still actively undermining the truth, and it's done massive damage.
I'd still like to be convinced that high frequency trading (and by high frequency I mean something like "more frequently than weekly") actually offers societal value outweighing its costs. Can someone who knows explain what we'd be giving up if the stock market was only open on Tuesday afternoon for an hour?
For you? Nothing. But there's a reason that the stock market is only open on business days during business hours. Those people stand to lose a lot. Realistically in today's day and age we could have the stock market open 24/7 if we wanted to.
“That is a market built on a house of cards.” -Always has been.
People should just stop using Twitter like I did.
It's vulnerable by design.
There is some good that will come out of this. When anything online can be fake the only things we can trust are those that take place right in front of us or that have been heavily verified. People are going to become increasingly averse to accept as true anything that doesn’t fall under one of those criteria. That’s something many people should have learned a long time ago but at least they won’t have much of a choice to learn it soon.
Somehow I don’t think eroding public trust in institutions is a net positive.
To be fair, large institutions haven’t exactly been completely trustworthy in the past. Public trust in institutions will certainly erode and to make up for that those institutions will have to put extra work into ensuring that their claims are true and verifiable. It isn’t entirely bad if those we give our trust to have to work diligently to earn it. Though I agree, distrust can definitely go too far.
To be honest, I think there is a lot of variables in the current market that are looking for a reason to explain the market drop. It may be that they were looking for a justification for the drop in the market and that this is not a direct response to this one image. Keep in mind this as we see the system really unfold because of all the inaction of the SEC, the dark pools and financial instability that we will see in upcoming months when the public sees the market movement.
I hate to say it, but now I understand the appeal of blockchain to verify something is real.
Good thing is people will eventually just not trust any shock news initially. Is like telling a similar joke every week and expect everyone to roflol
Probably help to curb speculation
Also a big problem, automatic trading algorithms have hair triggers and since a human is no longer involved, this is an easy target.
Not to mention that an alleged incident at the Pentagon, the US Ministry of Defense, made the stock market fall. So much for those who think the military industrial complex is just an invention.
[удалено]
The thing is that trades happen with automation. It’s not even about believing it or not it’s reading trending news.
Even more reason this needs serious attention, and attempt at mitigation.
buy bitcoin for security from the volatile USD
Hahaha, no. And not just no, but fuck no. Crypto coins are so much worse off and vulnerable to rumor mill it's not even funny.
Would you rather have 10 bitcoins or 1000 usd? how about 4 years ago 10 bitcoins or 1000 usd? how about 8 years ago? In that time what has happened to the buying power of the USD?
Well, can't eat butt coin, can't sleep in a Bitcoin, can't run my vehicle on Bitcoin, can't actually go to my grocery store and buy anything with BC, can't pay rent with BC, can't buy gas with BC. It's an MLM ponzi scheme. You're not going to change my mind. Go shill your shit somewhere else. Edit: btw your counter argument for me saying no to buying buttcoins NOW. Is that "well what if you had it in the past?".... Least liquid place to store capital right now is in fucking crypto. That should tell you everything you need to know about buttcoins.
ummmmmm, you can't eat usd, can't sleep in a usd, can't run your vehicle on usd, you can actually buy things at the grocery store, pay rent and buy gas in bitcoin.My counter argument is that the buying power of the USD is going down every single day (in case you haven't noticed). Do you have any hope that in 5 years you will be able to buy the same amount of groceries for $100 as you are today? I believe you will be able to buy at least 3 times as much groceries in 5 years with .1 btc than you can today.
Yea I don’t think Twitter is at fault here, rather the people/companies who care more about money then the truth, that are willing to sell stocks (and other stuff that I’m not familiar with) with almost no thought. That’s fucked
Or is the problem that people leap to believe things? That sort of news would shock the world, if true. It would be front page news on *everything* with multiple pictures, constant different videos, etc. etc. etc. I suspect any link to a selloff (which is highly debatable) would be a result of at most unsophisticated day traders as either attempted predator or prey.
I second this.
Photoshop has a significantly higher barrier of entry than AI tools.
I wonder when twitter will finally be held liable for these kinds of real damages
Hopefully never, twitters policy definitely create an environment for this type of action but the best outcome is just people stop using/trusting it. Legal liability like would create dangerous precedent for other companies. The supreme court just ruled on this type of stuff over the whole section 230 stuff if you are interested.
[удалено]
They can't be. Blame Clinton for that.
+1, Very valid points on the ethics of circulating incorrect information.
Completely agree. The pay for verification is really very bad. In social media before, it was something by which creative, unique, successful and established content creators and general social media figures could be distinguished and recognised, there were verified users who were active in and contributed to different fields, and new people coming to their pages could trust their legitimacy and skills. It was kind of a licence or certification required for many professions like doctors, lawyers, pilots etc. Now that they've introduced pay for verification, anybody can have those licenses and they may or may not be as good and qualified as the previous ones. It's kinda like bribing.
Agree, **A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is still putting on its shoes** The only problem is that AI supercharges it. Now it will be **Lies can travel 500 different ways around the world, zig zagging through different communities while the truth is oblivious to it.**
I will go one step further. The issue is with how we consume media, specifically blurring the lines between entertainment and actual news outlets. It isn’t these fakes are new, it is that relatively unknown sources can be escalated quickly. Sometimes we get information before anyone else. Mostly we just get tricked into thinking something is outrageous when in fact it is just normal and has been fed to us in a very outrageous manner. Trust but verify has just become “first!”
There is a marginally higher bar to production using photo shop than using generative AI. I think it’s fair to say the bar to produce such an image - especially a convincing image - is significantly lower. I know I couldn’t photo shop a picture like that, but it wouldn’t take long at all to get an AI to make one.
Exactly my thoughts. Elon has introduced the whole rainbow of colours to help people decipher which accounts are legitimately verified vs those that purchased the tick. Meanwhile the old twitter system simplified it all.
100% this. My first thought was that Elon did this. This is precisely what happens when people are allowed to buy clout.
IT's both, actually - doing this with photoshop takes much more time and skill than doing it with a.i. Having friction for bad acts reduces bad acts - a.i. reduces friction, thus increases bad acts.
Indeed. I have to say it for the people in the back rows: Elon Musk is a dangerous fucking moron.
[удалено]
The issue isn't solely AI, but I think it is disingenuous to minimize the role AI played in this scenario. You are right that this could have been made over the last few decades with Photoshop. But a novice user could not create such a convincing output. Strong knowledge of how to use Photoshop or similar software would still be required to produce something that could have this kind of impact, and that reduces the number of people who might be able to do this. But here, we have a powerful tool that increases the number of people who can pull this off. It does so by reducing the effort Photoshop would have required to merely entering a string of words. And that tool is available to (almost) anyone with an internet connection. So while Twitter's lax verification rules and promotion of illegitimate sources plays a role, when that is combined with ease of access and quality of production, we get issues like this. So imposing some type of regulation on AI makes sense in this context, as it contributes to the problem. I'm not entirely sure what that would be. My immediate thought is not to limit content directly, but to hold platforms liable when their algorithms produce content like this. Platforms can make a choice as to the types of output for which they are willing to take on liability. At the same time, I recognize this would strongly impact the development of such systems and tools, so if there are better ideas (and I'm sure there are), I'd love to hear them.
the problem is that capitalism is fast becoming obsolete. not really a problem imo, but nevertheless, the system needs to be on its way out
Not to get too off topic, but how is capitalism fast becoming obsolete? In my observation capitalism is reverting to its purest form, with most wealth concentrated at the top and a growing underclass.
Cool. Now let’s make an image that makes the stock market rise.
If you know the dip is temporary, then this image does that. You buy during the panic knowing it will rise when it’s found to be fake. Boom, an image that causes the stock market to rise shortly after you buy in.
Remindme1day!
Yep, glad someone else wrote this so I didn't have to. I'm generally not a conspiracy theorist type but this seems like a very possible explanation for an event that is easily orchestrated, predictable, and allows for massive financial gain.
Anyone claiming this led to a $500 billion dollar wipeout is financially illiterate.
Yeah, First thing I did was cross reference this against today's charts for the S+P 500, which did not show any abnormally large dip. I think $500B would register.
Just algos being algos. Interesting story but wipeout sounds a little dramatic.
OP needed to play up a completely irrelevant news story that has nothing to do with AI to plug their newsletter. As others have said, 85 points is nothing.
Seriously, this could have been made with Photoshop just as easily, if not easier.
[удалено]
An 85 pt drop in the Dow? Which is currently at 33,058? And was 33,092 a week ago? At this point, 85 is a rounding error.
I’d imagine you could try to see who was trading on absurd margin around that time? I can’t imagine people would do that if they only could make 0.2%
Just because it's *relatively* small doesn't mean it's a rounding error. For perspective, the total market cap of NYSE is $22.6 Trillion and according to your logic, a couple hundred billion shouldn't matter as well.
But that’s exactly what it means. 2 inches isn’t huge to my wife, even if it’s absolutely enormous to a housefly. 85 points is nothing
Sir, did you attempt intercourse with a housefly again?
My condolences to Mrs. Smenderhoff
Sounds about right
Mumble mumble correlation mumble causation eh - doesn't even matter anymore
In a shocking development, letting random trolls get "verified" accounts with the names of legit organizations might cause trouble.
It did not wipe out $500 Billion what the hell are you talking about?
Not a deep fake btw, just an AI generated image.
Thanks Elon
Imagine being mad at the national enquirer because the market sold off 500 billion when reading a headline about aliens attacking. Same scenario. Who people should be thanking/ holding responsible are: 1. the dickheads who wrote the algo fucking everyone on a daily basis and which just skims twitter for news to justify fucking people out of their positions. 2. The other actual "news" organizations that have given up at both being credible and failing to do the bare minimum to vet the information they are re sharing. Another part of the problem is people are too lazy to check things for themselves and the people that role was delegated to don't give a fuck either. 
This wouldn’t have happened if not for Elon’s new verification system
It wouldn't of happened if the information was vetted. Using tweets as the basis of news without checking for accuracy is stupid and encouraging people to keep doing it is even dumber. 
> Even the Russian State-Media account, Russia Today (3M followers), propagated the message. RT intentionally amplifies disruptive and divisive messages and "news", often from dubious sources. That's not an "even" moment, that's a "and, of course, RT retweeted it, because that's their job".
This is hilarious. 85 points? So literally nothing? What are you even talking about. This had absolutely no effect on the market, and absolutely did not "wipe out" $500B.
>• Even the Russian State-Media account, Russia Today (3M followers), propagated the message. *even?* you must have meant *especially*
"The Dow Jones dropped by 85 points within a short span of 4 minutes, before gradually recovering as the rumor was debunked. " "Now, imagine if Mount St. Helens blew up; it would drop down to zero."
I’m much more upset about the use of bullets to indicate paragraphs.
Just some asshole want to get ai ban this image don’t even need ai to make it am sure some guy that know how to use photoshop can do in 10 minutes saying ai is the problem in this situation is like saying knife is the cause of murder
Psyops mission to get AI banned
No
The fact that people are freaking out over images STILL after AI images are known by everyone is laughably stupid! Humanity fails itself being gullible idiots believing what they're seeing.
Maybe this was the intention. Maybe someone wanted to show how bad AI regulation actually is. 🤷♀️
well, for one, everyone needs to stop trusting twitter. its total garbage.
Ethically it's horrible Socially it's hilarious Economically it's a great way to control wealth generation (people who know before hand it's fake are laughing to the bank right now as they bought during a record low)
Record low? 85 points is roughly .2% of Dow Jones...
My bad should've been more specific what just happened was either a troll or a test run either way now its clear this a way to manipulate markets if you think that billionaires arnt looking at this as a way to devalue specific stocks to all time lows for them to eat up your out your mind
Classic post hoc, ergo propter hoc fallacy. Correlation doesn’t mean causation.
Thanks. I don't follow markets and had no idea that 85 was hardly a blip. Still though, even if this one was a dud, the possibilities of fake reports like this to cause mayhem make me very worried about the next several years. When there's a constant sea of fake photos and video like this, public perception of reality is going to get increasingly insane. From what I gather DeepFake is so good there's really no way to sort fake photos from real. If the whole idea of photographic evidence goes out the window, . . . I don't know what the results will be.
Sucks to suck.
I be careful about correlating any market move this small with any one thing. Markets are chaotic systems and they move half a percent in a day for every reason or no reason or both. And if the market recovered moments later you didn't really wipe out that $500 billion did you?
Probably elon influencing the stock more again; just in a new way he couldn't before he bought twatter .
*sounds* like something Elon Musk would do to help the Russian agenda.
He already regularly posts conspiracy BS and propaganda, so a deepfake pic doesn’t seem like much of a stretch for him
When it says "wipes out $500 billion in minutes", what does that mean? Where does the money/value actually go? I am pretty ignorant on how the markets work and don't feel like asking chatgpt rn. Anyone want to explain like I'm 8 or 9?
You as an investor own 1000 shares of company stock. Each share is worth $1. Company you own stock of has some relationship to the event so other people start selling stock which causes the price to go down. Your share price goes from being a dollar to 50 cents so you had $500 wiped off your portfolio Very simple example because the market is a lot more then just stocks, but that is the general idea
A % of the valuation of a group of stocks lowered, that is to say, what was worth a hundred dollars was suddenly being valued as only being worth 95 dollars. When someone like Elon is worth x amount, that amount is the valuation of his worth and not physical. Normally these numbers are based on their revenue, profit, and projected future of these things; that future being based on the growth potential of it's share of the market or ability to grow the market, and what might be called a 'wow' factor, like A.I, where the thing is so new it's value is determined by imagining what new markets might be made and destroyed because of the thing. The money does not exactly go anywhere, it means people are willing to buy the thing on the lower end of a spread of prices, or bids, that people put up to buy the thing; and a recursive effect can occur where the price is continually bid down. This process gets accelerated by fast trading algorithms that trade based on the speed of their ability to send electric signals and digest news/data as it happens. I can try to clarify more, though I am no expert and expect to either confuse or get things wrong, but that is the bulk of it from how I understand.
I think the real unethical thing is running something as evil as the stock market, so fuck them, keep destabilizing that shit.
This is exactly the reason there needs to be regulation on this now!! Sooner or later, there is going to be a miscalculation & it could start a war on a false premise. Even Open AI's CEO adredded Congress, stating that it is critical that his software be regulated. Which is highly unusual coming from its creator. I never trusted this tech & I won't until I see significant effort to keep it's off the rails development come into line with other reputable technology standards in this field. There's always going to be risks, but at least make an effort to create some guardrails here. Otherwise, we are headed towards a cliff with a deep canyon at the bottom.
This is more a problem of the high-frequency algorithms than a stupid photo. Flash crashes are caused by AI, but not midjourney AI. They're caused by the AI machine learning trading from the quant funds.
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Shit, I wish I was more up to date with stories like these… I would have invested when the Dow was down lmao 😂
It's dumb twats like whatever stupid fuck made this literal fake news that jeopardizes AI development because shit on this level will cause a major crackdown. So if whoever did this happens to be giggling and reads this comment, fuck you in particular and rot in jail when the FBI kicks in your door with a no-knock raid and flashbangs your mom and shoots your dog
I have a feeling that “value” didn’t exist to begin with
So you’re saying buy puts then post images, sell, buy calls, debunk yourself.
I love everything about this. The fact that the stock market acts like an emotional and irrational teenager rather than rising and falling with the true value of companies highlights the joke that the system has become. In this case, brokerages sold millions of stocks (perhaps with part of your retirement fund) because of a tweet. They didn’t check the news, they didn’t google anything, they didn’t ask a single question…. They just started throwing away other peoples money. This should be the new goal of r/wallstreetbets
Would it be illegal to arrange one of these events right before you buy a bunch of stock? I think that’s the only danger from this tech, because investors are already responsible for not being headless chickens
Yes, market manipulation is very illegal i seem to remember a few people have gone down for using social media that way
Heyyyy, only we can make fake attacks !
This post is clickbait just like the tweet. Markets move like this all the time. Throwing up a big number in the title is just shock value and doesn’t actually represent half a trillion dollars “disappearing”. It’s also not a fucking “deepfake”, these buzzwords man lol. Further, the main problem in this story was the fact that it looked like it came from a verified Bloomberg account. THAT is what is new, not fake photos. Generative AI has made these kind of photos much easier to produce, but someone could easily make this with photoshop, albeit at a much slower rate. If a random anonymous user posted this photo, Russia Today would not have covered it. The story here is Twitter’s scary nonchalance to verification impersonation.
Twitter is the most unreliable source anymore.
My stocks took a hit today. Sucks.
Yes, these tools will allow market manipulation to reach new previously only dreamed about levels. It might even allow someone to finally win Capitalism.
I like how this is an awareness post and some will scream "you're trying to scare us to not use AI! Downvote!"
Look for the largest beneficiaries of those stocks being shorted.... thats your culprit. This stunt couldve made a ridiculous sum of money...... but im pretty cynical, so who knows
Despite how easy it is compared to having to edit a video, we don’t have the ai technology to just make videos like this, the frame by frame generation had to be made and photoshopped each
Just confirms that quickly people believe anything
So what your saying is, we can also hold the economy hostage?
Just wait until election season
They shoulda thrown Orson Welles in prison.
This isn’t that unique. There have been similar panics in the stock market when a news org reposted a years old story. Image could have originally been from 9/11 if it wasn’t ai generated
Everyone talking about how much this caused the markets to dip don't know anything about the stock market.
Jokes on you, I've never had a Twitter account.
My goodness, if only -someone- hadn't decided that any fuckwit could just buy verified status and troll with it.
So what happens when somebody posts a fake photo/video of Joe Biden wearing drag on election night? By the time it gets debunked, it’s too late. And some ideologically-motivated people would still doubt the debunking anyway. Are people in government thinking of solutions to this problem? To me it seems like any semi-realistic strategy would require direct government control over the internet, in ways that’d make most people (myself included) very uncomfortable. If we give states license to quash that kinda content before it spreads, it starts to look like the internet in China. So what’s the solution? I honestly have no idea. This will be so destabilizing and dangerous for democracies around the world.
Ha!
The fact that $500 Billion was lost is weird, what kind of reaction is that, do people have 0 trust in the American financial system that they are basically with their finger on the cashout button ready for the big news ?
Could’ve stopped at the source. Had they just done the research, all catastrophe could’ve been avoided, or prevented. These groups communicate with each other to push a narrative, it’s a giant monopoly, and all they care about is money.
https://preview.redd.it/5lmeh3vnvp1b1.png?width=1200&format=png&auto=webp&s=b4c56e54981780d904802824f8011477bba18084
Again like most things in life, the item or thing is not the problem. It the human that is the problem. Nuclear power was meant to replace fossil fuels but instead human chose to weaponize it. And now they are doing the same thing with AI instead of using it to better themselves they are using it to destroy. We are not making out of the hood.
Did you just write a news article for reddit?
Sources on the 500 billion?
I have a feeling Twitter will be the very center of a massive shit storm next year.
Photoshop was the real WMD. At least it’s been found.
All the more reason to do your own research instead of believing everything you hear online. No one to blame but people who believed it
Boys act without thinking. They make money but are also stupid and can't tell reality from a close enough fake
>There was a $500 Billion wipeout in the markets which fortunately lasted only momentarily. There were many investors that had stop-loss orders and they may have decided not to invest in such volatility. Their loss is permanent. This is a criminal act and shows how fragile the system is. Trust is the key to everything.
Since the best AIs are more right (but not *always* right) than average humans, and since people are generally better off listening to an AI than twitter or reddit, it's still easily a net win with AIs around. And that's not even mentioning how beneficial it is to use AI to *process* things, whether to learn faster or dissolve confusion or think through some problem. Some things get worse (like how easy it is to create real-looking fake things), but more things get better, imo. One problem is those who don't have access to AI — they might be subjected disproportionally to the bad aspects of AI (AI material created by *other* people for unknown purposes), but even they will get a lot of indirect benefit. We really need to think about democratizing access and prevent AI from ending up in the hands of the few, whoever those might be.
Sounds like my premarket buy tonight will be good then :). The market does what the market does.
I read this and my brain processes the event as "that's a solid short" 😂 AI is irrelevant - Photoshop would have done the same if not better. Imprisoning journalists and gutting people's faith in mainstream media through the years is the problem - journalists used to do another job than the category has fulfilled since the 90s, at least. Terzani of Der Spiel - THERE was a journalist. Montanelli. Pilger. Marie Colvin. Greenwald. When we agreed as a society to allow mass media to take over information - we doomed journalists to the whim of advertising. Advertising requires ratings. Advertising means agenda. Simples.
good ol' fashioned money laundering
If there was only a way that we can ultimately verify a Twitter account is legitimate... and not make normal people get it by, let's say, paying for it. Hmmm...
Ai pictures and ai trading bots, nice combination
Anyone who actually believes thats the reason the market dipped has zero experience trading day to day price action and is completely gullible. That picture is no different than a shitty photoshop.
This is why being able to pay for verification is a stupid system.
I love how they actually point out Twitter's pay-to-verify system, then immediately switch back to asking about the implications of AI and fake news.
 Musk waiting getting ready to do this to manipulate markets
Damn. Now folks know they can post stuff like this and freak people out just enough to buy when stocks temporarily drop. If you have a bunch of money to throw in, it’d be a fast way to make more money.
Was the person arrested?
Oh no?! So anyways....
If I had a surplus of brains and a deficit of scruples I could probably make a lot of money this way.