AI · · ⏱ 4 min read

Sora 2 and the vanishing of reality

When video stops being proof: how Sora 2 proposes emotional experiences indistinguishable from the lived, and what that blurred frontier implies.

A film reel unspooling into fog
The reel blurs, and with it the line between what was and what only seems.

Excerpt

In an ecosystem saturated by massive models that prioritise performance over privacy, Sora 2 proposes an immersive experience of hyper-realistic video generation. But what does it imply that video stops being proof?

What really is a “good technology”?

Is it enough that something is impressive for it to be accepted? Or do we need to stop for a moment to think about how and for what we are using it?

The usual question tends to be: “Is this technically possible?”

But perhaps the questions that matter are others:

  • Should we use it?
  • At what price?
  • Under what conditions?
  • Who benefits… and who is left exposed?
  • What kind of society are we feeding with its use?

These questions are not merely philosophical. They are structural. Because every technology, however neutral it may seem, reorders things: our way of seeing, of deciding, of trusting, of living.

That is the basis of tech ethics: not thinking of technology as an end in itself, but as a vector that shapes reality and culture. A tool can solve one problem and at the same time generate another. It can expand rights… or deepen inequalities. It can create value… or manipulate desires.

Therefore, tech ethics is not limited to engineers or programmers, nor is it exhausted in regulations. It traverses every person who designs, consumes or disseminates technology. And it is articulated around values such as responsibility, justice, sustainability, social impact and transparency. It is, in short, the framework we need to understand not only what a technology does, but what it does to us.

Video as cultural battlefield: Sora 2 and suspicion

OpenAI’s Sora 2 proposes a new audiovisual era, where scenes generated from text are as realistic as a professional shoot. But what happens when what we see has no real referent at all? How do we filter between fiction and information if both blur without warning?

Identifying whether something was recorded or created is no longer enough. Video, until now used as “objective proof”, begins to lose its evidentiary status.

And with it, the pillars of trust on which social, political and legal truths are built waver.

Simulated experiences, real emotions

Sora 2 is not just a text-to-video model. It is a platform that allows:

  • Planning storyboard-style visual scripts.
  • Inserting your face and voice with just a reference video.
  • Creating emotional experiences that never happened.

So:

  • What differentiates a memory from a simulation?
  • Whom do we believe when a video shows something that never happened, but we feel it as real?
  • Can we live without distinguishing between what we saw and what we lived?

Who moderates perception?

OpenAI promises controls: optional cameos, traceability, default exclusions… But moderation is in the design, not in the use. The system facilitates virality, but does not guarantee context.

And that leaves us with more questions than answers:

  • Who controls emerging narratives when anyone can generate a video of “what could have happened”?
  • How is history defended when it can be rewritten with indistinguishable faces, gestures and voices?

The reader’s role: think before believing

This article does not seek to close with certainties, but to open with doubts. It invites you to look at each video with a magnifying glass, to ask yourself:

  • Who made it?
  • With what intention?
  • Why is it impacting me emotionally?

And above all:

To what extent does what I see shape what I believe?

Tech ethics, more than an academic discipline, stands as an indispensable compass in navigating the complex interaction between human beings and their technological creations. It explores its definitions, origins and pillars such as responsibility, justice, sustainability, social impact, transparency and equity.

However, in this constant technological evolution:

  • How do we ensure that artificial intelligence development preserves human dignity and avoids algorithmic biases?
  • How can biotechnology advance without crossing fundamental ethical lines regarding the manipulation of life?
  • Are we prepared as a society to distinguish reality from simulations generated by increasingly sophisticated technologies, and how will this affect our perception of truth?
  • Who takes final responsibility when an autonomous technology causes unforeseen damage?

Tech ethics urges us to maintain a constant dialogue, to question, to anticipate and to build a future where innovation serves collective well-being and not only the capacity of the possible. It is an invitation to continuous reflection and conscious action in the era of digital transformation.

References