For a creator posting a video, Google gives specific guidelines on whether to tag it as AI:
"Was AI used to generate or edit your content in any of the following ways?
- Makes a real person appear to say or do something they didn’t say or do
- Alters footage of a real event or place
- Generates a realistic-looking scene that didn’t actually occur
To follow YouTube’s policy, you’re required to tell us about your use of AI. This includes realistic sounds or visuals made or edited with AI. [View examples](https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/14328491)"
So oddly an intro graphic only has to be tagged as AI if it shows a real/realistic person, place, or event, but (per the examples page) apparently any AI-generated music counts.
> So has anyone managed to separate the effects of semaglutide from the effects of weight loss?
I was looking for that in particular. The study does say:
"To assess whether the observed effect was mediated by weight reduction, we performed a sensitivity analysis adjusting for change in BMI from baseline to week 104. In this adjusted model, the treatment effect coefficient was attenuated from β −0.092 to β −0.066 (P < 0.001), corresponding to a reduction of 28% in the estimated effect size. This attenuation indicates that 72% of the treatment-associated difference in 20-year dementia risk persisted after accounting for BMI change, suggesting that mechanisms beyond weight loss contribute to the observed proteomic signature modification."
100%, the author believes they learned the lesson, but failed to recognize what it looks like when a person on the other side initiates this process. It's amazing the dissonance here:
> They should expect a possible answer to be 'No' and be prepared to negotiate the difference. I didn't throw these wise words back at him, but that's what was going through my head. And it emboldened me further. I simply told him the room is unusable for yoga with the AC on and we've paid rent for the room.
They were emboldened to discard even mentioning negotiation and stood their ground instead. That might be fine if the lesson you're trying to illustrate is one about firm boundaries but the advice they're holding up here was very much the opposite.
The author there reads the point "Two different data entry operators, given a person’s name, will by necessity enter bitwise equivalent strings on any single system, if the system is well-designed" by thinking in terms of erroneous spelling, but also relevant is encoding issues such as lookalike characters.
True, though I think the point they're aiming at is that symbols like [new driver mark] contrast with literal pictograms like [symbol of person in wheelchair]. You can infer/guess the meaning of [symbol of person in wheelchair] 'without words' in a way that you can't with [new driver mark], because [symbol of person in wheelchair] is communicating with a picture instead, while [new driver mark] appears to be purely convention. (At least, the article doesn't seem to suggest otherwise.)
"Was AI used to generate or edit your content in any of the following ways?
- Makes a real person appear to say or do something they didn’t say or do
- Alters footage of a real event or place
- Generates a realistic-looking scene that didn’t actually occur
To follow YouTube’s policy, you’re required to tell us about your use of AI. This includes realistic sounds or visuals made or edited with AI. [View examples](https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/14328491)"
So oddly an intro graphic only has to be tagged as AI if it shows a real/realistic person, place, or event, but (per the examples page) apparently any AI-generated music counts.
reply