Discovered this today while browsing featured media on Wikipedia Commons.
Today’s video on Media Of The Day was a video about having sex in space. It is also pinned to the top of Wikipedia’s Sex In Space article.
It was amusing, but didn’t include citations or appear otherwise credible. It was made using a service called “simpleshow foundation”, which brands itself as “giving you the power to create simple and engaging videos with an easy-to-use, AI-powered video maker platform”.
So, yeah, more AI slop.
It is narrated by the Kurzgesagt guy, and didn’t look AI generated at a glance.
It’s also here on youtube from 8 years ago, when this technology was not available for regular folks https://youtu.be/Jy6MwwHpv1s
The yt channel links to https://simpleshow-foundation.org as the website.
Look at the date the file was created:
Date 31 May 2016Going back to the website then finds zero mention of AI nor was the technology really capable of creating anything like that video (or even parts of it)
https://web.archive.org/web/20160401142946/http://simpleshow.com/us-en/
So, per the comments in this thread, OP is misleading us?
Perhaps not intentionally, super annoying the way they phrased the title though. I guess it makes sense why news media says things like “allegedly” or “possibly”
But they’re not the same thing. The headline makes it sound as if Wikipedia is deliberately allowing AI-generated video, when the video in question is years old.
Yeah which I didn’t like as well tbh
I don’t see anything there suggesting Wikipedia themselves endorsed this video? Just because someone slips it into an article doesn’t mean its allowed.
Would it have been possible for a couple to fuck in space and ground control wouldn’t have known about it? 🤔 If no one has fucked in space, the only way we could visualize it is through artificial means. Be it AI or drawn by a human. I’m kinda okay with it for the sex in space article. But not much anywhere else. However: that video is not even AI generated? It’s like a JibJab video. 🤨
