“To prevent disinformation from eroding democratic values worldwide, the U.S. must establish a global watermarking standard for text-based AI-generated content,” writes retired U.S. Army Col. Joe Buccino in an opinion piece for The Hill. While President Biden’s October executive order requires watermarking of AI-derived video and imagery, it offers no watermarking requirement for text-based content. “Text-based AI represents the greatest danger to election misinformation, as it can respond in real-time, creating the illusion of a real-time social media exchange,” writes Buccino. “Chatbots armed with large language models trained with reams of data represent a catastrophic risk to the integrity of elections and democratic norms.”

Joe Buccino is a retired U.S. Army colonel who serves as an A.I. research analyst with the U.S. Department of Defense Defense Innovation Board. He served as U.S. Central Command communications director from 2021 until September 2023. Here’s an excerpt from his report:

Watermarking text-based AI content involves embedding unique, identifiable information – a digital signature documenting the AI model used and the generation date – into the metadata generated text to indicate its artificial origin. Detecting this digital signature requires specialized software, which, when integrated into platforms where AI-generated text is common, enables the automatic identification and flagging of such content. This process gets complicated in instances where AI-generated text is manipulated slightly by the user. For example, a high school student may make minor modifications to a homework essay created through Chat-GPT4. These modifications may drop the digital signature from the document. However, that kind of scenario is not of great concern in the most troubling cases, where chatbots are let loose in massive numbers to accomplish their programmed tasks. Disinformation campaigns require such a large volume of them that it is no longer feasible to modify their output once released.

The U.S. should create a standard digital signature for text, then partner with the EU and China to lead the world in adopting this standard. Once such a global standard is established, the next step will follow – social media platforms adopting the metadata recognition software and publicly flagging AI-generated text. Social media giants are sure to respond to international pressure on this issue. The call for a global watermarking standard must navigate diverse international perspectives and regulatory frameworks. A global standard for watermarking AI-generated text ahead of 2024’s elections is ambitious – an undertaking that encompasses diplomatic and legislative complexities as well as technical challenges. A foundational step would involve the U.S. publicly accepting and advocating for a standard of marking and detection. This must be followed by a global campaign to raise awareness about the implications of AI-generated disinformation, involving educational initiatives and collaborations with the giant tech companies and social media platforms.

In 2024, generative AI and democratic elections are set to collide. Establishing a global watermarking standard for text-based generative AI content represents a commitment to upholding the integrity of democratic institutions. The U.S. has the opportunity to lead this initiative, setting a precedent for responsible AI use worldwide. The successful implementation of such a standard, coupled with the adoption of detection technologies by social media platforms, would represent a significant stride towards preserving the authenticity and trustworthiness of democratic norms.

Exerp credit: https://slashdot.org/story/423285

  • rodbiren@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    10 months ago

    Good luck watermarking plaintext and locally run models. There is no good option. If you want certainty that you are dealing with a human you lose privacy. If you want privacy you cannot know where the plain text came from unless you sign each file cryptographically. Then you only know it came from a certain source, but there is no guarantee how that source made the text. Welcome to the new world.

    • tpihkal@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      10 months ago

      So what happens when we can’t trust everything we read on the Internet anymore?

      • kent_eh@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 months ago

        Spoiler alert: we’ve never been able to trust everything we read on the internet.

        • Serinus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          10 months ago

          In relative terms we could.

          The amount of disinformation and propaganda is about to become obscene.

          • fishos@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            Except, no, you can’t. The whole “you eat seven spiders at night a year” was a rumor created specifically to show how easy is to start rumors. And how many times has that little gem been floating around the internet? Or how about how often you hear experts say that people talking about their given field on the Internet are flat out wrong, but they sound charismatic, so they get the upvote?

            The Internet is full of DATA. It’s always been up to you to parse that info and decide what’s credible and what’s not. The difference now is that the critical thinking required to even access the Internet is basically nil and now everyone is on there.

            • Serinus@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              10 months ago

              I guess you don’t know what’s coming. Is there a lot of misinformation now? Certainly. But I’d say less than half the data is false.

              In the coming months you’re going to start seeing social media taken over by AI. You’re going to see pointed political “opinions” followed by several comments agreeing with the point being pushed. These are going to outnumber human comments.

              Currently, shills absolutely exist, but they’re far outnumbered by genuine people. That’s about to change. Money is going to buy public opinion on a whole new scale unless we learn to ignore anonymous social media.

              • fishos@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                10 months ago

                If you think that doesn’t already exist, you’ve been living under a rock. The Dead Internet Theory is pretty old at this point. I’m not saying you’re wrong, I’m saying that some of us have seen this trend coming long before AI was a buzzword and have been watching it already happen around us. I very much know what is coming because I’ve already watched it happen.

                • Serinus@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  10 months ago

                  Yeah, I mean 2015 was a big turning point, but this one should be bigger. It’s not black and white.

  • 𝘋𝘪𝘳𝘬@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago
    Hey ChatGPT, please generate a watermark matching the
    global watermarking standard for text-based AI-generated
    content and add it to this valid non AI generated text:
    
    [text here]
    

    “Hey $politician, why do you use AI to generate your speech? I have proof! The watermark does not lie!”

  • pedroapero@lemmy.mlOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    Seems to me that some form of image fingerprint stored with associated user account by AI providers would be more difficult to cheat.

      • fishos@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Which requires you to implement the watermark saying you’re an AI. Just… Don’t. If a regular person can make a watermark saying they are a real person, what’s to stop an AI from doing the same? What can the human do that the AI can’t? Unless you go down the draconian “everyone has a real ID linked to their digtal personna” route. And what’s to stop an AI from creating the text, a human from copying it and posting it as their own? Click farms already exist.