I built a small web tool for a problem I keep seeing: people encounter a suspicious social video and want a quick way to decide whether it deserves more verification before they share it.
The tool is called AI Video Detector. It accepts public social video links and uploads, then generates a first-pass evidence report.
The report focuses on cautious signals rather than final claims:
- source/media access quality
- visual artifact signals
- motion consistency signals
- compression signals
- audio-video consistency where available
- likelihood and confidence with limitations
The important product decision: the tool does not say it can prove whether a video is real or fake. It gives a structured signal report so users can decide whether to verify further, find the original source, or avoid sharing too quickly.
Iām looking for feedback on two things:
- Is the report language cautious enough for a sensitive category?
- Which signals would make the report more useful without overclaiming accuracy?
Top comments (0)