Filter
Exclude
Time range
-
Near
MeDOGEN retweeted
most compliance solutions are labels applied after the fact. provenance is different. it is attached at the moment of creation. you cannot fake a timestamp you did not control. that is the entire product.
China Times photographers register images at the moment of capture, before any editorial process begins. Shoot, upload through the Capture SDK, receive a NID. The C2PA manifest is embedded in the asset. The record lands on Numbers Mainnet. At any point after publication, the provenance chain is independently verifiable. No reliance on the publication platform. No reliance on internal records that can be edited. The record was made at origin. That is what makes it auditable. EU AI Act enforcement begins in August. Newsrooms have eight weeks. This is what a compliant pipeline looks like for a newsroom that built the receipt into the workflow, not bolted it on after. x402-chinatimes.numbersproto… Receipts before deadline.
15
4
19
721
Replying to @numbersprotocol
Labelling and Provenance are obviously different. Labels can be added to contents anytime but Provenance comes in at the point of creation.
10
Replying to @numbersprotocol
This clearly states the difference between Provenance and other random labelling. You only control what you created.
12
Replying to @numbersprotocol
Doesn't matter, $NUM is NOT an Ai company. You guys put hashes on photos, that does not scream real innovation.
7
Replying to @numbersprotocol
I actually thought it's just label that would be added Glad that it goes beyond label, now Provenance is taking full shape even in AI content.
12
Ebiefie Emmerson retweeted
the EU decided AI content needs receipts. Article 50 brings machine-readable marking, detection, and disclosure duties for AI-generated and manipulated content. most teams are still treating this like a label problem. the ones who will be ready are the ones who build the record before the mandate. provenance attached at capture is not the same as a label applied at publish.
the EU spent 7 months and hundreds of experts writing the rulebook for AI content labels. their own conclusion: no single watermarking technique is reliable enough. you need layers. final code published this week. Article 50 applies 2 August, 52 days to go. a label slapped on at publish can be stripped, cropped, or screenshot away. a record made at capture survives all three. ProofSnap does the capture part. the part the watermark can't.
3
3
22
616
Replying to @numbersprotocol
I don't think it's just label It's adding on-chain receipt to every AI content.
9
Replying to @numbersprotocol
Exceptional community and growth 🌟 Happy to discuss further 🤝
4
Lauren Protocol retweeted
Everyone is still arguing about whether AI content should be labeled. The law already decided that. It starts in August. The open question is quieter. Who can actually prove what their model made, after the fact, without taking their word for it. That part only gets solved by a record, not a label.
the EU spent 7 months and hundreds of experts writing the rulebook for AI content labels. their own conclusion: no single watermarking technique is reliable enough. you need layers. final code published this week. Article 50 applies 2 August, 52 days to go. a label slapped on at publish can be stripped, cropped, or screenshot away. a record made at capture survives all three. ProofSnap does the capture part. the part the watermark can't.
5
5
24
1,159
Replying to @numbersprotocol
At the end, a record is still better than a label because it can't be altered. Let's get started by August.
6
Replying to @numbersprotocol
It's no longer negotiable From August, it'll be implemented, there has to be a record about each AI content.
9
Replying to @numbersprotocol
Anticipating the implementation of the EU AI Act Article by August. Also, thanks for the opportunity, I joined the POAP campaign.
1
27