Start with the assumption the video is fake. Do you trust the source? If the video is of something outrageous, did you notice something feels uncanny? Does the lighting, shot angle, and proportions make sense?

If the answer is not yes, no, yes then it’s probably AI

It's getting harder and harder but some things still seem to work:

• emotional emphasis on the wrong syllables
• dissonance between facial expressions and vocal delivery
• AI writing giveaways (it's not A it's B etc.)
• dreamlike / "floaty" motion
• unrealistic "depth of field" (objects don't blur properly with distance)
• unrealistic lighting / coloring / appears stylized despite the attempted hyperrealism
• object permanence problems / subtle drift in sizes and proportions over time

Because even on the best drugs, my cat never says those things. He just refuses to cut the blue wire out of spite.

This video by Corridor Digital breaks it down pretty well for less tech-savvy people, but they have more videos that go in greater depth about spotting AI trickery.

Alot of voices are still pretty bad, like words and voice sound good, but their tone and emphasis is off for what they are saying.

A better question would be, how do I avoid being gullible with images and video so realistic?

Honestly, we're quickly moving into "assume AI unless proven otherwise" territory.

The same way you know if there's the Fae.

• Count the fingers
• Look for irregularities
• See where the glamour shimmers
• Ask them for their name

Don't assume that recognizing fakes is a younger generation thing. Maybe the people spotting them grew up reading snopes and alt.folklore.urban so that they have a good idea of how urban legends, hoaxes and clickbait are constructed.

It's worth pointing out that whatever tips you get here, accurate though they may be today, are likely to be less accurate with time and this tech is improving at a rapid pace so if this is important to you, you'll have to keep on top of what techniques for discernment are current at any given time or if there even remain any reliable techniques at all.

Looks like eventually it's all going to come down to context and your assessment of the trustworthiness of the source. If something is so sensational it seems unbelievable and you don't have much trust in the source from which you saw it, it probably is literally unbelievable until further corroboration emerges. This is a pretty exhausting model when modern live involves so much media consumption but I'd advise that there's also an element of practicality you should incorporate in to your evaluation. You'll have to decide if the answer to the question "is this AI?" is important for any given situation before actually investing any time or energy in to answering it. Sometimes you might get the calculation wrong and it turned out that by assuming something was innocuous enough not to matter one way or the other you ended up being misinformed about something that actually was important but at the end of the day we're only mere mortals and can sometimes be wrong.

Checking the channel that uploaded can also give a clue. A lot of the slop channels just flood variations of the same thing. They just post a thousand generated videos of different dog doing the exact same thing or "people" having the exact same fight etc.

That guys voice.

Plus, minor grammatical errors. eg. "Has increased the Tens of times"

Also, Bruce Lee having a fight.

Whenever I don’t like the video or the person in it it’s ai.

They always look a bit shiny/glossy

I would be concerned with the type of media I'm consuming in the first place if ai can make it problematic

discern what’s real from what’s created to play with my emotions and generate money for the creator or advance an agenda.

Not mutually exclusive.

When AI can make a convincing facsimile of something, that thing in its genuine form is already hollow and manipulative.