#FactCheck - Viral Videos of Mutated Animals Debunked as AI-Generated
Executive Summary:
Several videos claiming to show bizarre, mutated animals with features such as seal's body and cow's head have gone viral on social media. Upon thorough investigation, these claims were debunked and found to be false. No credible source of such creatures was found and closer examination revealed anomalies typical of AI-generated content, such as unnatural leg movements, unnatural head movements and joined shoes of spectators. AI material detectors confirmed the artificial nature of these videos. Further, digital creators were found posting similar fabricated videos. Thus, these viral videos are conclusively identified as AI-generated and not real depictions of mutated animals.

Claims:
Viral videos show sea creatures with the head of a cow and the head of a Tiger.



Fact Check:
On receiving several videos of bizarre mutated animals, we searched for credible sources that have been covered in the news but found none. We then thoroughly watched the video and found certain anomalies that are generally seen in AI manipulated images.



Taking a cue from this, we checked all the videos in the AI video detection tool named TrueMedia, The detection tool found the audio of the video to be AI-generated. We divided the video into keyframes, the detection found the depicting image to be AI-generated.


In the same way, we investigated the second video. We analyzed the video and then divided the video into keyframes and analyzed it with an AI-Detection tool named True Media.

It was found to be suspicious and so we analyzed the frame of the video.

The detection tool found it to be AI-generated, so we are certain with the fact that the video is AI manipulated. We analyzed the final third video and found it to be suspicious by the detection tool.


The detection tool found the frame of the video to be A.I. manipulated from which it is certain that the video is A.I. manipulated. Hence, the claim made in all the 3 videos is misleading and fake.
Conclusion:
The viral videos claiming to show mutated animals with features like seal's body and cow's head are AI-generated and not real. A thorough investigation by the CyberPeace Research Team found multiple anomalies in AI-generated content and AI-content detectors confirmed the manipulation of A.I. fabrication. Therefore, the claims made in these videos are false.
- Claim: Viral videos show sea creatures with the head of a cow, the head of a Tiger, head of a bull.
- Claimed on: YouTube
- Fact Check: Fake & Misleading
Related Blogs

AI and other technologies are advancing rapidly. This has ensured the rapid spread of information, and even misinformation. LLMs have their advantages, but they also come with drawbacks, such as confident but inaccurate responses due to limitations in their training data. The evidence-driven retrieval systems aim to address this issue by using and incorporating factual information during response generation to prevent hallucination and retrieve accurate responses.
What is Retrieval-Augmented Response Generation?
Evidence-driven Retrieval Augmented Generation (or RAG) is an AI framework that improves the accuracy and reliability of large language models (LLMs) by grounding them in external knowledge bases. RAG systems combine the generative power of LLMs with a dynamic information retrieval mechanism. The standard AI models rely solely on pre-trained knowledge and pattern recognition to generate text. RAG pulls in credible, up-to-date information from various sources during the response generation process. RAG integrates real-time evidence retrieval with AI-based responses, combining large-scale data with reliable sources to combat misinformation. It follows the pattern of:
- Query Identification: When misinformation is detected or a query is raised.
- Evidence Retrieval: The AI searches databases for relevant, credible evidence to support or refute the claim.
- Response Generation: Using the evidence, the system generates a fact-based response that addresses the claim.
How is Evidence-Driven RAG the key to Fighting Misinformation?
- RAG systems can integrate the latest data, providing information on recent scientific discoveries.
- The retrieval mechanism allows RAG systems to pull specific, relevant information for each query, tailoring the response to a particular user’s needs.
- RAG systems can provide sources for their information, enhancing accountability and allowing users to verify claims.
- Especially for those requiring specific or specialised knowledge, RAG systems can excel where traditional models might struggle.
- By accessing a diverse range of up-to-date sources, RAG systems may offer more balanced viewpoints, unlike traditional LLMs.
Policy Implications and the Role of Regulation
With its potential to enhance content accuracy, RAG also intersects with important regulatory considerations. India has one of the largest internet user bases globally, and the challenges of managing misinformation are particularly pronounced.
- Indian regulators, such as MeitY, play a key role in guiding technology regulation. Similar to the EU's Digital Services Act, the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, mandate platforms to publish compliance reports detailing actions against misinformation. Integrating RAG systems can help ensure accurate, legally accountable content moderation.
- Collaboration among companies, policymakers, and academia is crucial for RAG adaptation, addressing local languages and cultural nuances while safeguarding free expression.
- Ethical considerations are vital to prevent social unrest, requiring transparency in RAG operations, including evidence retrieval and content classification. This balance can create a safer online environment while curbing misinformation.
Challenges and Limitations of RAG
While RAG holds significant promise, it has its challenges and limitations.
- Ensuring that RAG systems retrieve evidence only from trusted and credible sources is a key challenge.
- For RAG to be effective, users must trust the system. Sceptics of content moderation may show resistance to accepting the system’s responses.
- Generating a response too quickly may compromise the quality of the evidence while taking too long can allow misinformation to spread unchecked.
Conclusion
Evidence-driven retrieval systems, such as Retrieval-Augmented Generation, represent a pivotal advancement in the ongoing battle against misinformation. By integrating real-time data and credible sources into AI-generated responses, RAG enhances the reliability and transparency of online content moderation. It addresses the limitations of traditional AI models and aligns with regulatory frameworks aimed at maintaining digital accountability, as seen in India and globally. However, the successful deployment of RAG requires overcoming challenges related to source credibility, user trust, and response efficiency. Collaboration between technology providers, policymakers, and academic experts can foster the navigation of these to create a safer and more accurate online environment. As digital landscapes evolve, RAG systems offer a promising path forward, ensuring that technological progress is matched by a commitment to truth and informed discourse.
References
- https://experts.illinois.edu/en/publications/evidence-driven-retrieval-augmented-response-generation-for-onlin
- https://research.ibm.com/blog/retrieval-augmented-generation-RAG
- https://medium.com/@mpuig/rag-systems-vs-traditional-language-models-a-new-era-of-ai-powered-information-retrieval-887ec31c15a0
- https://www.researchgate.net/publication/383701402_Web_Retrieval_Agents_for_Evidence-Based_Misinformation_Detection

One of the best forums for many video producers is YouTube. It also has a great chance of generating huge profits. YouTube content producers need assistance to get the most views, likes, comments, and subscribers for their videos and channels. As a result, some people could use YouTube bots to unnaturally raise their ranks on the YouTube site, which might help them get more organic views and reach a larger audience. However, this strategy is typically seen as unfair and can violate the YouTube platform’s terms of service.
As YouTube grows in popularity, so does the usage of YouTube bots. These bots are software programs that may automate operations on the YouTube platform, such as watching, liking, or disliking videos, subscribing to or unsubscribing from channels, making comments, and adding videos to playlists, among others. There have been YouTube bots around for a while. Many YouTubers widely use these computer codes to increase the number of views on their videos and accounts, which helps them rank higher in YouTube’s algorithm. Researchers discovered a new bot that takes private information from YouTube users’ accounts.
CRIL (Cyble Research and Intelligence Labs) has been monitoring new and active malware families CRIL has discovered a new YouTube bot virus capable of viewing, liking, and commenting on YouTube videos. Furthermore, it is capable of stealing sensitive information from browsers and acting as a bot that accepts orders from the Command and Control (C&C) server to carry out other harmful operations.
The Bot Insight
This YouTube bot has the same capabilities as all other YouTube bots, including the ability to view, like, and comment on videos. Additionally, it has the ability to steal private data from browsers and act as a bot that takes commands from a Command and Control (C&C) server for various malicious purposes. Researchers from Cyble discovered the inner workings of this information breach the Youtube bot uses the sample hash(SHA256) e9dac8b677a670e70919730ee65ab66cc27730378b9233d944ad7879c530d312.They discovered that it was created using the.NET compiler and is an executable file with a 32-bit size.
- The virus runs an AntiVM check as soon as it is executed to thwart researchers’ attempts to find and analyze malware in a virtual environment.
- It stops the execution if it finds that it is operating in a regulated setting. If not, it will carry out the tasks listed in the argument strings.
- Additionally, the virus creates a mutex, copies itself to the %appdata% folder as AvastSecurity.exe, and then uses cmd.exe to run.
- The new mutex makes a task scheduler entry and aids in ensuring
- The victim’s system’s installed Chromium browsers are used to harvest cookies, autofill information, and login information by the AvastSecurity.exe program.
- In order to view the chosen video, the virus runs the YouTube Playwright function, passing the previously indicated arguments along with the browser’s path and cookie data.
- YouTube bot uses the YouTube Playwright function to launch the browser environment with the specified parameters and automate actions like watching, liking, and commenting on YouTube videos. The feature is dependent on Microsoft. playwright’s kit.
- The malware establishes a connection to a C2 server and gets instructions to erase the entry for the scheduled task and end its own process, extract log files to the C2 server, download and run other files, and start/stop watching a YouTube movie.
- Additionally, it verifies that the victim’s PC has the required dependencies, including the Playwright package and the Chrome browser, installed. When it gets the command “view,” it will download and install these dependencies if they are missing.
Recommendations
The following is a list of some of the most critical cybersecurity best practices that serve as the first line of defense against intruders. We propose that our readers follow the advice provided below:
- Downloading pirated software from warez/torrent websites should be avoided. Such a virus is commonly found in “Hack Tools” available on websites such as YouTube, pirate sites, etc.
- When feasible, use strong passwords and impose multi-factor authentication.
- Enable automatic software updates on your laptop, smartphone, and other linked devices.
- Use a reputable antivirus and internet security software package on your linked devices, such as your computer, laptop, and smartphone.
- Avoid clicking on suspicious links and opening email attachments without verifying they are legitimate.Inform staff members on how to guard against dangers like phishing and unsafe URLs.
- Block URLs like Torrent/Warez that might be used to propagate malware.To prevent malware or TAs from stealing data, keep an eye on the beacon at the network level.
Conclusion
Using YouTube bots may be a seductive strategy for content producers looking to increase their ranks and expand their viewership on the site. However, the employment of bots is typically regarded as unfair and may violate YouTube’s terms of service. Utilizing YouTube bots carries additional risk because they might be identified, which could lead to account suspension or termination for the user. Mitigating this pressing issue through awareness drives and surveys to determine the bone of contention is best. NonProfits and civil society organizations can bridge the gap between the tech giant and the end user to facilitate better know-how about these unknown bots.

Introduction
Monopolies in any sector can have a great impact on economic efficiency and, by extension, on the market and the larger economy. Data monopolies hurt both small startups and large, established companies, and it is typically the biggest corporate players who have the biggest data advantage. Google has recently lost a major antitrust case filed by the U.S. Department of Justice, which focused on the company's search engine dominance and expensive partnerships to promote its products. The lawsuit accused Google of using its dominant position in the search engine market to maintain a monopoly. The case has had a significant impact on consumers and the tech industry as a whole. This dominance allowed Google to raise prices on advertisers without consequences, and delay innovations and privacy features that consumers want when they search online.
Antitrust Allegations Against Google in the US and EU
In the case filed by the US Department of Justice, US District Judge Amit Mehta ruled that Google was monopolistic. In the 10-week-long trial, Google lost the major antitrust lawsuit, and it was established that the tech giant had a monopoly in the web search and advertising sectors. The lawsuit accused Google of using its dominant position in the search engine market to elbow out rivals and maintain a monopoly. The tech giant’s exclusive deals with handset makers were brought before the court as evidence. Additionally, the European Commission has fined Google €1.49 billion for breaching EU antitrust rules in 2019.
The Impact of Big Tech Monopolies on the Digital Ecosystem and Beyond
- Big-tech companies collect vast amounts of personal data, raising concerns about how this data is used and protected. The concentration of data in the hands of a few companies can lead to privacy breaches and misuse of personal information.
- The dominance of a few tech giants in digital advertising markets can stifle competition, leading to higher prices for advertisers and fewer choices for consumers. This concentration also allows these companies to exert major control over what ads are shown and to whom.
- Big-tech platforms have substantial power over the dissemination of information. Their algorithms and policies on content moderation can influence public discourse and may spread misinformation. The lack of competition means fewer alternatives are accessible for users seeking different content moderation policies. In 2021 Google paid $26.3 billion to ensure its search engine is the default on smartphones and browsers and to keep control of its dominant market share.
Regulatory Mechanisms in the Indian Context
In India, antitrust issues are governed by the Competition Act of 2002 and the Competition Commission of India (CCI) checks monopolistic practices. In 2022, the CCI imposed a penalty of Rs 1,337.76 crore on Google for abusing its dominant position in multiple markets for 'anti-competitive practices' in the Android mobile device ecosystem. The Draft Digital Competition Bill, 2024, has been proposed as a legislative reform to regulate a wide range of digital services, including online search engines, social networking platforms, video-sharing sites, interpersonal communication services, operating systems, web browsers, cloud services, advertising services, and online intermediation services. The bill aims to promote competition and fairness in the digital market by addressing anti-competitive practices and dominant position abuses in the digital business space.
Conclusion
Big-tech companies are increasingly under scrutiny from regulators due to concerns over their monopolistic practices, data privacy issues, and the immense influence on markets and public discourse. The U.S. Department of Justice's victory against Google and the European Commission's hefty fines are indicators of a global paradigm shift towards more aggressive regulation to foster competition and protect consumer interests. The combined efforts of regulators across different jurisdictions underscore the recognition that monopolistic practices by such big tech giants can stifle innovation, harm consumers’ interests, and create barriers for new entrants, thus necessitating strong legal frameworks to ensure fair and contestable markets. Overall, the increasing regulatory pressure signifies a pivotal moment for big-tech companies, as they face the challenge of adapting to a more tightly controlled environment where their market dominance and business practices are under intense examination.
References
- https://www.livemint.com/technology/tech-news/googles-future-siege-u-s-court-explores-breaking-up-company-after-landmark-ruling-11723648047735.html
- https://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/technology/what-is-the-google-monopoly-antitrust-case-and-how-does-it-affect-consumers/article68495551.ece
- https://indianexpress.com/article/business/google-has-an-illegal-monopoly-on-search-us-judge-finds-9497318/