AI May Have Already Altered One of Your Memories: Here’s What It Means

You might have come across videos online featuring Donald Trump and Elon Musk. These clips recreate iconic scenes from shows like Breaking Bad. Additionally, you may have seen footage of them dancing to the classic hit “YMCA” at the Great Year Day Party.

The catch is that while one of these scenarios actually took place, the other is a fabrication created using artificial intelligence (AI). You may recall both events, but can you tell which one is *?

In psychological terms, the “source monitoring framework” illustrates how we identify the origins of our memories.

This framework treats the source of a memory as a cohesive unit of information, encoded alongside other elements of our experiences.

However, the “tags” that denote the origins of a memory can easily fade, leaving other aspects intact.

As a result, AI-generated clips may blur in our minds with actual events, which is a growing concern as the quality of AI videos continues to improve.

Many of us hold fragmented memories but often struggle to distinguish what’s real from imagined scenarios – Credit: Gary Yowell via Getty

This dissociation between memory content and its origin is a common occurrence. You may recognize the actor on screen, yet find yourself unable to recall any other films or shows he has appeared in.

Such memory lapses help elucidate how “false memories” can easily form, as demonstrated in studies by Professor Elizabeth Loftus.

Her research indicates that when certain ideas are suggested to us, we may foster them in our own minds but later forget their original source, leading us to confuse them with genuine experiences.

According to Loftus’s findings, AI can easily plant numerous false memories in our minds, particularly when we consume artificial content in environments similar to those where we consume authentic news.

This raises critical questions about how to label AI-generated content and how to help people remember that it is fictional.

*For clarification, the dance at the New Year’s Eve party was indeed real.


This article responds to the inquiry (posed by Christopher Wiley of Birmingham): “Does artificial intelligence give us false memories?”

Please email us your questions at Question @sciencefocus.com or reach out via Facebook, Twitter, or Instagram (please include your name and location).

Explore more of our ultimate Fun facts and captivating science pages


Read more:


Source: www.sciencefocus.com

The scent of flowers is altered by air pollution, confusing insects

Hawk moths are less likely to visit flowers if air pollution changes their smell.

Image courtesy of Floris van Brugel

Insects may have a hard time finding flowers because air pollutants are breaking down the chemicals responsible for the flowers' attractive scent.

“In recent years, there has been increasing interest in 'sensory pollution,'” he says. Jeff Riffel at the University of Washington in Seattle. This pollution resulting from human activities can change wild animal behavior by changing or introducing new stimuli, he says.

For example, we know that noise pollution affects bird songs and may be linked to an increase in whale strandings. Light pollution, on the other hand, can disorient a variety of animals, including migratory birds and sea turtles.

However, little is known about how human activities affect animals' sense of smell. Riffel and colleagues therefore investigated the effects of anthropogenic pollutants on plant pollinators.

They focused on ozone and nitric acid radicals, which are pollutants produced by the interaction of vehicle exhaust and gases in the atmosphere. Both are known to react with compounds emitted by flowers to change their scent.

The research team discovered pale evening primrose (evening primrose), a desert flower found in North America. Both pollutants degraded aroma compounds, but nitrate radicals did so more completely.

To study whether this led to changes in the behavior of the flowers' main pollinators, the researchers exposed species of hawk moths, including the hawk-moth sphinx.Hyles Lineata), flowers that emit a natural floral scent, or flowers that have been engineered to emit a degraded scent.

Primroses that emitted degraded scents were visited 70% less frequently than flowers that emitted naturally delivered scents. This decline in visitors could affect the hawkmoth's health, Riffel said. Researchers estimate that reduced moth visitation could reduce the amount of fruit plants produce by 28 percent, potentially having ripple effects on the broader ecosystem.

The researchers' models show that since the Industrial Revolution, the distance at which hawk moths can detect flowers has shrunk from about two kilometers to just a few hundred meters.

“This is another reason why we need to switch to energy sources that do not involve combustion,” say team members. Joel Thornton, also at the University of Washington. “Reducing nitrogen oxide emissions would be a win not only for air quality, but also for ecosystem function and agriculture.”

topic:

Source: www.newscientist.com

Facebook Board Announces Rule Allowing Altered Video Depicting Biden as Pedophile

Meta’s oversight board determined that a Facebook video falsely alleging that U.S. President Joe Biden is a pedophile did not violate the company’s current rules, but expressed that the rules were “disjointed”. It was acknowledged that the focus is too narrow on AI-generated content.

The board, which is funded by Facebook’s parent company Meta but operates independently, took on the Biden video case in October after receiving user complaints about a doctored seven-second video of the president.


The board ruled that under current policies, the misleading altered video would only be prohibited if it was created by artificial intelligence or made to appear to say words that were not actually said. Therefore, Meta was correct in continuing to publish the video.

This ruling is the first to criticize Meta’s policies against “manipulated media” amidst concerns about the potential use of new AI technology to influence upcoming elections.

The board stated that the policy “lacks a convincing justification, is disjointed and confusing to users, and does not clearly articulate the harms it seeks to prevent.” It suggested updating the policy to cover both audio and video content, and to apply a label indicating that it has been manipulated, regardless of whether AI is used.

It did not require the policy to apply to photos, as doing so could make enforcement too difficult at Meta’s scale.

Meta, which also owns Instagram and WhatsApp, informed the board that it plans to update its policies to address new and increasingly realistic advances in AI, according to the ruling.

The video on Facebook is a manipulated version of real footage of Biden exchanging “I voted” stickers with his granddaughter and kissing her on the cheek during the 2022 US midterm elections.

The board noted that non-AI modified content is “more prevalent and not necessarily less misleading” than content generated by AI tools.

It recommended that enforcement should involve applying labels to content, rather than Meta’s current approach of removing posts from the platform.

The company announced that it is reviewing the ruling and will respond publicly within 60 days.

Source: www.theguardian.com