It feels like a header is the wrong tool for this, even if you hypothetically would want to disclose that, would you expect a blog cms to offer the feature? Or a web browser to surface it?
layer8 · 8m ago
Why only for HTTP? This would be appropriate for MIME multipart/mixed part headers as well. ;)
Maybe better define an RDF vocabulary for that instead, so that individual DIVs and IMGs can be correctly annotated in HTML. ;)
throwaway13337 · 1h ago
Can we have a disclosure for sponsored content header instead?
I'd love to browse without that.
It does not bother me that someone used a tool to help them write if the content is not meant to manipulate me.
Let's solve the actual problem.
rossant · 1h ago
Interesting initiative but I wonder if the mode provides sufficient granularity. For example, what about an original human-generated text that is entirely translated by an AI?
dijksterhuis · 1h ago
> what about an original human-generated text that is entirely translated by an AI?
probably ai-modified -- the core content was first created by humans, then modified (translated into another language). translating back would hopefully return you the original human generated content (or at least something as close as possible to the original).
| class | author | modifier/reviewer |
| ----------------- | ------ | ----------------- |
| none | human | human/none |
| ai-modified | human | ai | <--*
| ai-originated | ai | human |
| machine-generated | ai | ai/none |
grumbel · 54m ago
Completely the wrong way around. We are heading into a future where everything will be touched by AI in some way, be it things like Photoshop Generative Fill, spell check, subtitles, face filters, upscaling, translation or just good old algorithmic recommendations. Even many smartphones already run AI over every photo they make.
Doing it in a HTTP header is furthermore extremely lossly, files get copy around and that header ain't coming with them. It's not a practical place to put that info, especially when we have Exif inside the images themselves.
The proper way to handle this is mark authentic content and keeping a trail of how it was edited, since that's the rare thing you might to highlight in a sea of slop,
https://contentauthenticity.org/ is trying to do that.
Years ago people were arguing that fashion magazines should have to disclose if they photoshopped pictures of women to make them look skinnier. France implemented this law, and I believe other countries have as well. I believe that we should have similar laws for AI generated content.
ugh123 · 1h ago
Hoping I don't need to click on something, or have something obstructing my view.
odie5533 · 47s ago
The cookie banner just got 200px taller.
GuinansEyebrows · 35m ago
Maybe an ignorant question but at the dictionary level, how would one indicate that multiple providers/models went into the resulting work (based on the example given)? Is there a standard for nested lists?
xhkkffbf · 1h ago
I'm all for some kind of disclosure, but where do we draw the line. I use a pretty smart grammar and spell checker, one that's got more "AI" in it to analyze the sentence structure. Is that AI content?
stillpointlab · 48m ago
According to the spec, yes a grammar checker would be subject to disclosure:
> ai-modified Indicates AI was used to assist with or modify content primarily created by humans. The source material was not AI-generated. Examples include AI-based grammar checking, style suggestions, or generating highlights or summaries of human-written text.
Maybe better define an RDF vocabulary for that instead, so that individual DIVs and IMGs can be correctly annotated in HTML. ;)
I'd love to browse without that.
It does not bother me that someone used a tool to help them write if the content is not meant to manipulate me.
Let's solve the actual problem.
probably ai-modified -- the core content was first created by humans, then modified (translated into another language). translating back would hopefully return you the original human generated content (or at least something as close as possible to the original).
Doing it in a HTTP header is furthermore extremely lossly, files get copy around and that header ain't coming with them. It's not a practical place to put that info, especially when we have Exif inside the images themselves.
The proper way to handle this is mark authentic content and keeping a trail of how it was edited, since that's the rare thing you might to highlight in a sea of slop, https://contentauthenticity.org/ is trying to do that.
> ai-modified Indicates AI was used to assist with or modify content primarily created by humans. The source material was not AI-generated. Examples include AI-based grammar checking, style suggestions, or generating highlights or summaries of human-written text.