Vincenzo martemucci

Blending creativity, data, and AI engineering.

  • Puglia is shrinking, and the latest figures from Istat aren’t just dry statistics—they are a wake-up call for anyone who cares about the future of South Italy. In just the first ten months of 2025, my home region lost nearly 9,000 residents. Once the final December tally is in, we are looking at a permanent loss of over 10,000 people in a single year.

    As someone born and raised in this land, it is painful to see Italy heel losing its pulse. The decline isn’t felt equally everywhere, but the trend is undeniable: Taranto and Lecce are bleeding residents the fastest, while even traditionally robust hubs like Bari are barely holding steady.

    A Crisis of Cradle and Career

    The math of the “demographic winter” is brutal. We are seeing a perfect storm of two factors:

    1. The Birth Gap: Between January and October, Puglia recorded roughly 17,000 births against over 31,000 deaths. We are simply not replacing the generations that came before us.
    2. The Great Migration: This isn’t just about people moving; it’s about a “fuga dei cervelli” (brain drain). Puglia has the highest percentage of university students in Italy who flee to northern regions to find an education and, eventually, a career. We are exporting our best talent and what are we importing?

    The Economic Wall

    Why aren’t we having children? The Istat report is blunt: a third of young Italians cite economic instability, while others point to inadequate working conditions or the sheer lack of a stable partner. In a region where the cost of living keeps rising but the “social elevator” feels stuck, many Pugliesi feel forced to choose between a family and a future.

    The Surprising Safety Net

    Surprisingly, the only thing preventing a total demographic collapse is international immigration. The “contribution” from abroad brought in a net positive of 11,000 units. Without these new residents, Puglia’s decline would be twice as fast. It’s a paradox: while my fellow Pugliesi head North to seek their fortune, others are coming from across the globe to fill the void we leave behind.

    Puglia remains one of the most beautiful places on Earth—a land of ancient olives, baroque architecture, and deep tradition. But a land without young people is a museum, not a home. Unless something fundamental changes in the labor market and support for families, we are watching the slow, quiet emptying of the place I call home.


    +
  • +
  • Daily writing prompt
    You get to build your perfect space for reading and writing. What’s it like?

    A quiet, comfortable, wooden space. Filled with my favorite books, musical sheets, and a piano. Isolated from outside, a personal, safe, welcoming micro-world where only I and a few selected people have access.

    Meanwhile, I bought this small bookcase, which is already insufficient to hold all the books I have here.

    I really miss the books, comics, and musical scores I left behind in Italy at my parents’ house.

    They are a part of my life, my education, my passions. Little by little, perhaps, I’ll have them all sent over. But when every book is transferred, when every object I left behind is back in my possession, then I’ll feel that perhaps the separation from my country of origin will be even deeper. Almost total, almost definitive.

    So when people ask me what I miss most about the dear old world… Perhaps the answer is precisely: my books.

    But actually, I also miss the ease with which you can stop and chat with friends and acquaintances, maybe quickly over a coffee that each of us will want to pay for the other.

    And the unique landscapes, dotted with the small and great traditional and social differences between the various cities that, despite everything, have a single, strong root in hundreds and hundreds of years of history and traditions.

    And perhaps, even more than anything else, the focaccia.

    +
  • I love the world of social media, communication, and cooking. Above all, I love the cuisine of my home country, Italy. And rightly so, because Italian cuisine—universally recognized as one of the best in the world—has recently been declared an intangible cultural heritage of humanity.

    In my opinion, this recognition is unnecessary, obvious, trivial… but nevertheless pleasing to many. I, on the other hand, am totally indifferent: the value of our cuisine certainly does not need UNESCO’s stamp of approval. It is an obvious, well-known, self-evident value.

    Despite this, I note with a hint of concern the spread of countless American restaurants and dishes in Italy. As an Italian citizen by birth and an American by naturalization, I find this almost incomprehensible. Why would anyone bite into a lobster roll when they can enjoy a mouthwatering sandwich with ingredients that are either impossible to find or extremely expensive in the rest of the world?

    I am thinking of real Parma ham, mortadella from Bologna, and local cured meats which, although they do not have PDO or PGI labels, embody flavors, techniques, and raw materials where authenticity is not an option but the very foundation of their preparation.

    I also consider it reductive to extend the recognition of “intangible heritage” to Italian cuisine as a whole. Ours is such a rich, unique, and diverse country that its true wealth lies in its regional, and often municipal, cuisines.

    While Gravina uses the so-called “Rùccolo,” the delicious focaccia of San Giuseppe, Altamura — a neighboring city — prepares Pasticcio. Two recipes that are similar in some ways, but profoundly different, just like the dialects that describe them. Extend this argument to the entire peninsula and you will understand how truly unique our country is: a constellation of culinary identities unmatched anywhere else in the world.

    So I ask myself: why open a slew of fast food restaurants serving French fries, hamburgers, smashburgers, fried chicken, and lobster rolls?

    Was this globalization really necessary?

    My answer, as a romantic and perpetually deluded expatriate, is a resounding no.

    The extreme irony is that many of these new restaurants call themselves ‘American’ despite the fact that, for a large proportion of Italians — partly due to Trump’s second presidency — the United States is a hated, abusive, and inherently evil country.

    Then, however, a “smashburgeria” opens and the lines go around the corner. I find it delusional, but not surprising. If I have understood anything about us Italians, it is that we do not behave rationally, especially when it comes to food.

    You risk death threats if you use pancetta instead of guanciale in carbonara… but then everyone queues up for a lobster roll. A sandwich with lobster drenched in butter, which — for goodness’ sake — might make sense once a year, but can never reflect the authenticity of two slices of bread with tomato, good olive oil, and wild oregano.

    You don’t even need salt: the flavor comes, or rather came, from real products, which we are losing.

    It’s over, my friends. The proponents of this debacle are, Italian people.

    Because they are the ones who welcome, applaud, and finance restaurants that offer foods that do not belong to them. Often frozen, often ultra-processed.

    America has so much to offer and many dishes are fantastic, but they are certainly not sandwiches, hot dogs and various fried foods. No one in Italy offers a real blueberry pie, or a pecan pie, or Thanksgiving turkey; no one cooks authentic crab cakes or real chicken wings.

    America is not just smashburgers and pancakes.

    I’m thinking of Cajun cuisine from Louisiana, Texan barbecue where the flavor comes from wood and hours of smoking; I’m thinking of soul food from the Southern States, fusion cuisine from Hawaii.

    America also has its own culinary excellence: less numerous than italian ones, of course, but real nonetheless. And it certainly doesn’t coincide with what some entrepreneurs hungry for money sell in Italy as “American food.”

    In a world rushing towards standardization, Italian cuisine remains the last true bastion of Italianidentity: not a brand, not a label, but a living heritage made up of hands, dialects, memories, and small differences that change from city to city.

    If Italians continue to chase fads that do not belong to them, they risk losing what is most precious to them: their authenticity.

    And that, unlike smashburger joints, cannot be reopened.

    +
  • +
  • Generative AI tools created a new, scary set of problems. It is extremely easy to insert anyone into deepfake pornography that is believable. The issues are immense: smearing, defamation, shame, disgrace. And the victims have little to no recourse.

    AI technology is so advanced that it takes less than 15 minutes to create a FREE 60-second deepfake pornographic video starting from a single clear image of a face.

    The issue is only now becoming mainstream, after celebrities were victims of circulation on social media platforms of pornographic videos with their appearance.

    Even Italy’s prime minister, Giorgia Meloni, has been a victim of this awful crime, among other Italian celebrities.

    Obviously, the problem is not just in Italy, my country of origin, but is global, affecting American celebrities and K-pop stars. Their images were taken and misused, often with widespread visibility (millions of views).

    The main issue is quite simple: AI development is far outpacing the development of safety technologies.

    We discussed how watermark technologies on AI-generated videos might already be dead on arrival.

    Other deepfake detectors are struggling, too, to keep up with deepfake-generation tools, and what’s worse, the technology to generate such videos is now widely available.

    What makes matters worse is that websites explicitly dedicated to deepfake porn actively host this content, and the problem will continue unless decisive action is taken against those platforms.

    The implications are not just technological; victims might find themselves fighting a viral machine that spreads their fake content everywhere. An unstoppable waterfall of links that keeps spreading from messaging apps to social media. Stopping the flow is impossible. And authorities usually have little to no help for the victims.

    The only solution seems to be an AI vs. AI battle, where platforms can immediately remove inappropriate AI content, but the “Good AI” is already losing, and the existence of website hosting SPECIFICALLY this kind of videos, really doesn’t help.

    In the USA, 49 states (on top of DC) have legislation against non-consensual distribution of intimate images. However, the laws differ from state to state, but the internet is global. Additionally, almost every law requires proof that the perpetrator acted with intent to harass or intimidate the victim. How could this be proven if the perpetrators are usually shielded by layers of digital anonymity?

    While in the USA, there is still discussion on whether the distribution of deepfake porn should be considered a criminal or civil matter, in the United Kingdom, the Online Safety Act clearly criminalizes the distribution of deepfake porn.

    Something similar was proposed in the EU, which, of course, gave member states until 2027 to implement their own laws, potentially replicating the US patchwork of regulations.

    South Korea is quite advanced on the matter; it doesn’t require proof of malicious intent and directly addresses deepfake materials.

    China has a similar law, but its effects are unknown.

    The reality is simple, but bleak. We can pass laws and create AI tools, but none will really matter if PEOPLE keep choosing to misuse technology.

    The problem is not the code, it’s the human behavior. Deepfake porn exists because individuals decide to create it, share it, and consume it. Until society evolves —and not just the algorithms —no amount of legislation or innovation will stop the harm.

    I think, in this regard, I have the perfect Italian saying: “The mother of fools is always pregnant.”

    +
  • Artificial intelligence, such as huge language models, is designed to present information that sounds truthful, but in reality, they do not care about truth. Their goal is not truth; it is usefulness. Moreover, that distinction carries profound philosophical implications.

    The Philosophy of Lying: Humans vs. Machines

    Humans usually lie to deceive others, even though they know the truth. AI, on the other hand, does not lie with the same awareness or intent. It generates an acceptable and satisfying response for the user.

    AI’s relationship with truth is, therefore, fundamentally different from ours.

    The Feedback Loop of Usefulness

    AI systems are trained to be (or feel) useful to accommodate user intent. This funny tweet summarizes it perfectly.

    Moreover, that is precisely how AIs work: based on human feedback. The more positive the feedback, the more it reinforces the same pattern that generated the response. Often, good feedback aligns with truthful answers. However, that is not always the case; sometimes, the most pleasing response is not the most accurate one. This behavior is not out of malice, but it is a byproduct of mere optimization.

    Constructed Truths and Partial Arguments

    These systems do a fantastic job at building half-truths that sound complete. They stitch bits of information together into answers that seem valid and convincing. However, sounding right is not the same as being right.

    The Role of Human Intervention

    The best way to avoid this kind of behaviour is, as is often the case, through human intervention.

    As with every tool shaped by human hands, artificial intelligence must remain subordinate to human wisdom because in the end, no algorithm can love truth for its own sake. Only a person can.

    +
  • AI image and video generators are improving by leaps and bounds day after day. I had my share of “fun” by creating funny, bizarre, or test videos to test the limitations of such technologies. Above, you can see a video that encapsulates all three categories; however, it clearly displays “SORA” watermarks.

    The video is clearly absurd; however, it plausibly depicts me. With a prompt that describes a plausible scenario, an AI-generated video could trick some people into believing it’s really me.

    In May 2025, a Microsoft Study with 12,500 global participants demonstrated that people can detect AI-generated images with a success rate of ~62%.

    Everyone — OpenAI, X, Google, etc. — is pushing hard on video generation, and the improvements are tangible, and I expect those numbers to fall further.

    The overregulating European Union, through the AI Act, mandates watermarking of AI-generated images, and many companies have implemented watermarks.

    Sora did so with an “explicit” watermark, which is easily blurred by… AI-generated watermark removal apps. Oh, the irony. But the most robust AI image watermark proposed is only detectable by computers and resistant to basic editing techniques like cropping or blurring.

    But how does this technique Work?
    The principle is straightforward but not trivial: the method embeds the watermarks directly in the spectral domain of the images, rather than visible pixels.

    High-frequency regions (e.g., hair or fabric details) change rapidly across pixels, while low-frequency areas (e.g., skin or sky) change slowly.

    Watermarks embed spectral alterations in these low-frequency regions, making them invisible to humans but detectable by algorithms.

    Sounds very cool —technically challenging but smart.

    But guess what, this technique could be dead on arrival.

    The University of Waterloo, Canada, developed an attack that erases those watermarks and can make them indistinguishable from real images, also for computers. They did this by creating an open-source tool, “the UnMarker Tool” (https://github.com/andrekassis/ai-watermark). Researchers presented the project at the 2025 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy.

    The tool is written in Python and does not require exotic hardware: it can run on an NVIDIA A100 GPU or even an RTX 5090 (expected for consumer use), and has an average runtime of ~5 minutes per image to remove the watermark.

    And it’s pretty effective: UnMarker removed between 57% and 100% of watermarks across tests.

    Including the latest Google DeepMind’s SynthID watermarks. Removing 79% of them. This prompted Google to dispute the success rate, claiming lower real-world effectiveness.

    But the tool also removed nearly all of the HiDDeN and Yu2 watermarks.
    And in general, it succeeded in defeating 60%+ of modern watermarking methods (like StegaStamp and Tree-Ring Watermarks).

    The implications are obvious.

    If a watermark can be erased in minutes on a consumer GPU, authenticity becomes optional. Additionally, the tool doesn’t have to be perfect either, since there’s no reliable way to prove whether an image or video is AI-generated, plausible deniability is granted. In an online world built on visuals, that’s a serious problem.

    Digital forensics just got harder, too. Journalists, investigators, and regulators lose one of their few technical verification anchors. And as always, the EU’s AI Act, like most of its regulations, might already be outdated before enforcement even begins.

    The only absolute path forward may be embedding authenticity not inside the pixels but in the metadata itself, through encryption or blockchain-style verification.

    In short, UnMarker cracked the illusion of safety through obscurity.
    And once again, open-source curiosity outpaced corporate control and overregulation.

    The race for authenticity isn’t over, but it just got a lot more interesting.

    Author’s Note: Written by Vincenzo Martemucci, an Italian-American AI & Data Professional based in Atlanta(GA). No AI writing tools were used.

    +
  • English

    I do not maintain any presence on social media platforms—including, but not limited to, Meta-owned services (e.g., Instagram, Facebook, WhatsApp) or similar platforms.

    I do not use third-party or consumer messaging applications such as Telegram, Signal, or comparable services.

    Any accounts, messages, or communications purported to originate from me on such platforms are not authentic.

    Sincerely, Vincenzo Martemucci

    Italiano

    Non sono presente su alcuna piattaforma di social media — incluse, a titolo esemplificativo ma non esaustivo, le piattaforme di proprietà del gruppo Meta (ad esempio Instagram, Facebook, WhatsApp) o servizi analoghi.

    Non utilizzo applicazioni di messaggistica di terze parti o di consumo come, ad esempio, Telegram, Signal o servizi comparabili.

    Qualsiasi account, messaggio o comunicazione che dichiari di provenire da me su tali piattaforme è da considerarsi non autentico.

    Cordialmente, Vincenzo Martemucci

    +