Just because something isn't perfect doesn't mean it's not useful. I've already seen posts online that were able to be proven as falsified because someone ran the images through Google for SynthID checks.

> How old is photoshop and why is it exempt?

For one, it's not developed by Google or OpenAI. The barrier to entry to making realistic but deceptive images with Photoshop is far higher than with AI, and there are already techniques that can, imperfectly, be used to detect the use of traditional image editing.

>How old is photoshop and why is it exempt?

I'm sure you can think of a couple things that differentiate gen AI from photoshop, I believe in you.

Strictly speaking, DRM = digital rights management, which is related to intellectual property.

SynthID would only be DRM if Google/OpenAI were claiming IP rights over their images. I don’t even know if that’s legal though.

For the record: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Printer_tracking_dots

> How old is photoshop and why is it exempt?

How does today’s maximum theoretical disinformation output per minute compare to 2021 Photoshop?

You: "performative nonsense! Arbitrary metadata not of my choosing!"

Also you: well, games go through some kind of distribution, which has plenty of telemetry and metadata. Whether it is App Store with notarization, or Steam or Itch who collect analytics and know a lot about you, or your ISP if you self host your eclectic WebGL game from home. Posting on an iPhone or Android phone, to hacker News which has your email address, on your cell network which has IPv6 globally unique addresses...

"But my choosing!" You'll say. It is extremely performative of you to say, "everything that would make me 200% wrong isn't valid."

I don't know. I really hate these vibes-driven reactions to (checks notes) content attribution. Every accusation is a confession in this frame of mind. How do you not see that?