I'm genuinely starting to think that these tools are being built to make us question our reality, provide plausible deniability to crimes we see happening right now in the middle east, and to encourage people to stop trusting everything they see and read.
What’s the actual use case for this that’s not malicious? When would someone want to generate a fake satellite image of a selectable area? Is it for architects that want to visualize projects?
But for real, this is bad. Like, really, really bad. And I understand this could have been done before by just screenshotting an image from Google Maps and feeding into an AI image processor, but now, that whole process is streamlined and immediately available, and Google’s messaging is that we can just fact check it ourselves with another AI tool.
Well, that’s only possible with the original, non-altered image. Someone takes a screenshot and puts this up on a news broadcast or Twitter post, and then, how is anyone going to determine what is real or fake anymore?
What isn't reasonable about this approach? I think most people have got GeoAI backwards, creating derived imagery via AI is a terrible idea. Building better tools than we have with AI, using existing geoscience principles is absolutely the right approach.
Google’s inane push to shove AI into every product is going to cause real harm here. I can’t even fathom what the legitimate use case for this would be.
I've been sent a cease and desist letter from the European Union for researching their satellite imagery with legitimate reasons. I cannot believe that Google is getting away with something like this. It's awful how much concern trolling I have to go through while Big Tech gets a free pass for just about anything.
This is actually insane. I'm usually indifferent toward AI integrations, I've learned to ignore them like I ignore most ads, but what the hell? The people who came up with this must be absolutely divorced from reality.
I'm genuinely starting to think that these tools are being built to make us question our reality, provide plausible deniability to crimes we see happening right now in the middle east, and to encourage people to stop trusting everything they see and read.
What’s the actual use case for this that’s not malicious? When would someone want to generate a fake satellite image of a selectable area? Is it for architects that want to visualize projects?
It’s like it was specifically built for Fox News…
But for real, this is bad. Like, really, really bad. And I understand this could have been done before by just screenshotting an image from Google Maps and feeding into an AI image processor, but now, that whole process is streamlined and immediately available, and Google’s messaging is that we can just fact check it ourselves with another AI tool.
Well, that’s only possible with the original, non-altered image. Someone takes a screenshot and puts this up on a news broadcast or Twitter post, and then, how is anyone going to determine what is real or fake anymore?
> how is anyone going to determine what is real or fake anymore
Through using AI to build tools that generate results with a verified chain of provenance.
This is satire right?
No.
What isn't reasonable about this approach? I think most people have got GeoAI backwards, creating derived imagery via AI is a terrible idea. Building better tools than we have with AI, using existing geoscience principles is absolutely the right approach.
> "No, these are ground-truth pixels"
- Disclosure Day (2026)
All media conglomerates will have a field day with this. CNN, MSNBC, and Fox have all been caught doing exactly these kinds of things.
Don't act like the left has never lied or manipulated their stories, they're all equally terrible and soulless.
Yes, CNN has done it 13 times, MSNBC 27, and FOX well over 12,000 and counting.
You can say "these are all the same" but if you can't see why people single out FOX that says a lot about your credibility.
Google’s inane push to shove AI into every product is going to cause real harm here. I can’t even fathom what the legitimate use case for this would be.
Seems to be completely uncensored. Crazy they shipped this.
So that's why they're killing off the desktop client. They can't figure out how to make it suck.
I've been sent a cease and desist letter from the European Union for researching their satellite imagery with legitimate reasons. I cannot believe that Google is getting away with something like this. It's awful how much concern trolling I have to go through while Big Tech gets a free pass for just about anything.
Who the fuck thought this would be a good feature? What the fuck is wrong with this industry.
Reasonably clear explanation here:
https://ludic.mataroa.blog/blog/ai-mania-is-eviscerating-glo...
Short quote to capture the main point:
"I have evidently fallen into the pocket of Hell where the demons torment me by doing elaborate impressions of absolute fucking morons."
This is actually insane. I'm usually indifferent toward AI integrations, I've learned to ignore them like I ignore most ads, but what the hell? The people who came up with this must be absolutely divorced from reality.
Haven't you heard? If you can, you should. You'd be an idiot not to. And hey, even if you don't, the next guy will. So you may as well.
Terrible irresponsible feature.