Viral Video Of Chinese Paraglider's Accidental 8,000-Metre Flight Might Be AI-Generated
A viral video of a Chinese paraglider accidentally being propelled more than 8,000 metres high by an updraft has been found to be generated by artificial intelligence, at least partially, according to a report in NBC News. 55-year-old Peng Yujiang claimed that he was paragliding at approximately 3,000 metres, but the unexpected conditions carried him nearly 5,000 metres higher.
He endured temperatures around -40 degrees Celsius and dangerously low oxygen levels. Despite experiencing hypoxia and severe frostbite, Mr Peng managed to remain conscious and safely navigated back to the ground.
However, the investigation reveals that the first five seconds of the video might be AI-generated. In the clip, Mr Peng can be seen gliding at high altitude with his legs dangling, but the footage is seemingly cropped.
The crop omitted a logo belonging to Doubao AI, suggesting it was likely created by the ByteDance-owned company's AI tool. The same portion of the video was uploaded separately to Facebook on May 25 with the company's watermark.
"It's unclear if the remaining footage of Peng gliding through the sky which differs from the first five seconds is authentic or not," the publication stated.
GetReal Labs, an AI-verification company, corroborated the claims, stating that the analysis of the footage yielded proof of AI use.
"We were able to extract a few frames and analyze them using our Inspect platform, and our models confirm that the images are synthetic," said GetReal Labs, adding that several other elements in the video differed from the rest of the footage.
News agency Reuters, which distributed the clip without the AI logo has taken down the video. Other news outlet have also removed their versions of the video.
"We have reason to believe this is an AI-generated video and are currently working on killing this footage," Reuters said.
Peng banned
Notably, Mr Peng was testing secondhand paragliding equipment when the alleged incident took place. The video clip instantly went viral on social media with users lauding him for keeping calm.
"I had just bought a second-hand paragliding harness and wanted to test it, so I was conducting ground parachute shaking. After a while, the wind suddenly picked up and lifted me into the air. I tried to land as soon as possible, but I failed," Mr Peng told the Chinese media.
Mr Peng and his friend, who posted the video, received six-month bans from paragliding activities due to unauthorised flight and safety violations.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
an hour ago
- Mint
Here's a tip to companies: Beware of promoting AI in products
It seems like it's the latest marketing strategy: Push the idea that your product or service has artificial intelligence in it. But recent research suggests that approach could backfire and actually turn off consumers. The effect is especially pronounced for offerings perceived to be riskier buys, such as a car or a medical-diagnostic service, say the researchers, who were from Washington State University and Temple University. 'When we were thinking about this project, we thought that AI will improve [consumers' willingness to buy] because everyone is promoting AI in their products," says Dogan Gursoy, a regents professor of hospitality business management at Washington State and one of the study's authors. 'But apparently it has a negative effect, not a positive one." In multiple experiments, involving different people, the researchers split participants into two groups of around 100 each. One group read ads for fictional products and services that featured the terms 'artificial intelligence" or 'AI-powered," while the other group read ads that used the terms 'new technology" or 'equipped with cutting-edge technologies." In each test, members of the group that saw the AI-related wording were less likely to say they would want to try, buy or actively seek out any of the products or services being advertised compared with people in the other group. The difference was smaller for items researchers called low risk—such as a television and a generic customer-service offering. Decisions seemed to come more from the heart than the head—that is, they were based mostly on emotions, say the researchers. Those with a negative view didn't trust AI-enabled products and services, especially if they didn't understand what AI in the offering does or if the offering poses any sort of safety risk. And that prevented them from making a clear assessment about whether they wanted to make a purchase. Gursoy says that he and colleagues are now working on additional projects to identify the cause of negative attitudes toward AI, though they speculate that concern for privacy is one. For example, the researchers found that enthusiasm for an AI-enabled refrigerator was weaker than for all the other products in the low-risk category. It could be that people just don't see the point of AI in a fridge, Gursoy says. 'Consumers simply see fewer compelling benefits," says Gursoy. 'A 'smart' fridge often carries a premium price tag, requires regular software updates and may raise privacy concerns if it tracks your groceries or eating habits." Meanwhile, a separate, forthcoming study from market-research firm Parks Associates that used different methods and included a much larger sample size came to similar conclusions about consumers' reaction to AI in products. 'We straight up asked consumers, 'If you saw a product that you liked that was advertised as including AI, would that make you more or less likely to buy it?' " says Jennifer Kent, the firm's vice president of research. Of the roughly 4,000 Americans in the survey, 18% said AI would make them more likely to buy, 24% said less likely and to 58% it made no difference, according to the study. 'Before this wave of generative AI attention over the past couple of years, AI-enabled features actually have tested very, very well," Kent says. While Gursoy's research didn't provide any insight into whether younger people are more receptive to AI in products and services than older people, Kent says her firm's study did. Among younger respondents (age 18 to 44), 24% to 27% said they would likely buy a product advertised as including AI, compared with 18% overall. Among respondents age 65 and older, 32% said they would be less likely to buy a product advertised with AI, compared with 24% overall. In any case, companies have to do a better job of making the argument for AI in their products, both Gursoy and Kent say. 'While AI-enabled appliances are appealing in theory," says Gursoy, 'the specific advantages of AI must be obvious and worthwhile to justify the investment." Sean Captain is a writer in New York. He can be reached at reports@
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
Quick commerce apps stack up extra fees to curb losses
ETtech ETtech Quick commerce companies have begun adding a range of fees — from platform and handling charges to convenience, small-cart and rain levies — to customer orders in an attempt to shore up their unit economics, or earnings from each transaction, according to industry executives and analysts.A check across the top five quick commerce apps shows these charges, which come on top of the standard delivery fees and vary across cities and platforms, range between 6 and 30 per its app, Zepto says it levies a handling charge 'towards handling of products in your orders at our stores', while rival Blinkit says this fee goes towards ensuring 'proper handling' and 'high-quality quick deliveries'. Zepto and Instamart offer bulk orders at platforms charge a higher handling fee on large is also a surge fee, charged during high-demand hours or when there is a shortage of delivery workforce and the order value is below certain thresholds. Eternal Ltd-owned Blinkit, Swiggy 's Instamart and Zepto control 80–85% of India's quick commerce fees are not unusual in the consumer internet ecosystem. Companies in segments including food delivery, online travel, movies and event ticketing and big ecommerce platforms such as Amazon and Flipkart also levy similar the quick commerce segment, however, these fees assume significance given the rising competition in the sector, which has resulted in the top three players, as well as others like BigBasket's BBnow and Flipkart Minutes, increasing discounting to all-time high levels, as reported by ET on June platforms have also raised the minimum order value to unlock free deliveries, which again suggests that platforms are pushing customers towards higher AOV (average order value) purchases, analysts at brokerage firm JM Financial wrote in a research report. 'These service fees lead to improvement of take rates for these platforms as it directly goes to revenue and subsequently leads to margin improvement.'Take rates refer to the ratio of a company's gross order value to its executives said intensifying competition has prevented them from increasing delivery charges, where they continue to subsidise a gap between what they collect from a consumer and pay to the gig worker.'One of the components of expanding losses, besides expansion of the dark store footprint, is the inability to increase delivery fees,' a senior executive at a quick commerce company said. 'Right now, companies are focused on retaining their power users as much as they are going behind new customers. For most new markets, anyway companies offer a few free or discounted deliveries.'Market leader Blinkit reported an operational loss of Rs 178 crore for the January-March period, almost five times wider than the same quarter last year. Swiggy Instamart's operating loss jumped nearly threefold to Rs 840 crore in the same quarter. The parents of both Blinkit and Instamart are Blinkit, Zepto, BigBasket and Flipkart Minutes did not reply to ET's emails seeking food delivery players such as Zomato, also owned by Eternal, have reported a meaningful contribution to their unit economics from the levy of a platform fee. Zomato and rival Swiggy have increased their platform fees from Rs 2 in August 2023 to Rs 10 in October 2024. The companies have retained the fees at Rs 10 as they fear customer attrition in a market that is already witnessing sluggish the quick commerce sector, however, the market is steadily expanding, and is estimated to become $31 billion by FY28 from $8.2 billion in FY25, as per BNP Paribas.'As new platforms launch their service and as incumbent platforms enter each other's turf, they are likely to offer higher discounts initially. We expect even high-end convenience seeking users to shift in search of better bargains,' the brokerage firm said. 'Incumbents are unlikely to let go of their high-end users and will likely respond. We believe we are currently in this phase and expect this to continue for at least the next 9-12 months at least.'Eternal chief financial officer Akshant Goyal, during the company's March-quarter earnings call, said that the company would continue to chase market share for Blinkit even if it came at the cost of near-term profitability.'Platforms take commissions from brands but there is a limit to how much commission they can charge,' said Mandar Lande, cofounder and chief executive of food delivery platform Waayu. 'Meanwhile, their marketing and customer acquisition costs are rising as they are entering new markets and rising competition. So, they are levying these additional charges (such as service fee, platform fee) on the consumers.'Users have been complaining on social media about the rising costs and hidden charges. A user on microblogging site X said last month that Zepto was charging GST on item handling fee and rain hidden charges have also been recognised as one of the 13 dark patterns by the central government, which in the first week of June asked consumer internet platforms to submit a self-audit of such manipulative tactics within three months to ensure they are not indulging in these practices.
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
QComm Orders Are Becoming More Feesible
Quick commerce companies have begun adding a range of fees — from platform and handling charges to convenience, small-cart and rain levies — to customer orders in an attempt to shore up their unit economics, or earnings from each transaction, according to industry executives and analysts. A check across the top five quick commerce apps shows these charges, which come on top of the standard delivery fees and vary across cities and platforms, range between ₹6 and ₹30 per order. On its app, Zepto says it levies a handling charge 'towards handling of products in your orders at our stores', while rival Blinkit says this fee goes towards ensuring 'proper handling' and 'high-quality quick deliveries'. Zepto and Instamart, which also offer bulk orders at discounts. Both platforms charge a higher handling fee on large baskets. There is also a surge fee, charged during high-demand hours or when there is a shortage of delivery workforce and the order value is below certain thresholds. Eternal Ltd-owned Blinkit, Swiggy's Instamart and Zepto control 80-85% of India's quick commerce market. These fees are not unusual in the consumer internet ecosystem. Companies in segments including food delivery, online travel, movies and event ticketing and big ecommerce platforms such as Amazon and Flipkart also levy similar charges. For the quick commerce segment, however, these fees assume significance given the rising competition in the sector, which has resulted in the top three players, as well as others like BigBasket's BBnow and Flipkart Minutes, increasing discounting to all-time high levels, as reported by ET on June 16. Most platforms have also raised the minimum order value to unlock free deliveries, which again suggests that platforms are pushing customers towards higher AOV (average order value) purchases, analysts at brokerage firm JM Financial wrote in a research report. 'These service fees lead to improvement of take rates for these platforms as it directly goes to revenue and subsequently leads to margin improvement.' Take rates refer to the ratio of a company's gross order value to its revenue. Industry executives said intensifying competition has prevented them from increasing delivery charges, where they continue to subsidise a gap between what they collect from a consumer and pay to the gig worker. 'One of the components of expanding losses, besides expansion of the dark store footprint, is the inability to increase delivery fees,' a senior executive at a quick commerce company said. 'Right now, companies are focused on retaining their power users as much as they are going behind new customers. For most new markets, anyway companies offer a few free or discounted deliveries.' Market leader Blinkit reported an operational loss of ₹178 crore for the January-March period, almost five times wider than the same quarter last year. Swiggy Instamart's operating loss jumped nearly threefold to ₹840 crore in the same quarter. The parents of both Blinkit and Instamart are listed. Instamart, Blinkit, Zepto, BigBasket and Flipkart Minutes did not reply to ET's emails seeking comment. Earlier, food delivery players such as Zomato, also owned by Eternal, have reported a meaningful contribution to their unit economics from the levy of a platform fee. Zomato and rival Swiggy have increased their platform fees from ₹2 in August 2023 to ₹10 in October 2024. The companies have retained the fees at ₹10 as they fear customer attrition in a market that is already witnessing sluggish growth. For quick commerce sector, however, the market is steadily expanding, and is estimated to be $31 billion by FY28 from $8.2 billion in FY25, as per BNP Paribas. 'As new platforms launch their service and as incumbent platforms enter each other's turf, they are likely to offer higher discounts initially. We expect even high-end convenience seeking users to shift in search of better bargains,' the brokerage firm said.
