8 ms·
Combined with Face2Face[1] live video impersonation, it is truly time to be very careful verifying videos or even live streams. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v
by eadz 9y ago
Combined with Face2Face[1] live video impersonation, it is truly time to be very careful verifying videos or even live streams.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ohmajJTcpNk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ohmajJTcpNk
- ericfrederich 9y agoAwesome... Not sure if the voice thing can be done in realtime yet, but you're right... the combination of these two would be awesome
- red023 9y agoHoly shit this is crazy!
- red023 9y agoYeah vote me down coward. Because I used a "evil" forbidden word. I even used in a positive context to show how amazed I am about this facial manipulation (much much more then about the voice thing) Flag me ban me I do not fucking care. I can make another account.
- grzm 9y agoYou were likely down-voted more because your first comment doesn't add anything substantive to the discussion rather than for the language you used. As the guidelines ask, please don't comment on being downvoted, as it makes for boring reading. And doing so in the manner you did is definitely uncalled for. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- Mz 9y agoIf you are referring to the word "shit," it is not forbidden here and is not likely the reason you were downvoted. I have a terrible potty mouth. I try to keep it PG-13ish online, but if I am tired or something, the way I actually talk tends to come out. My tendency to use the F word like other people use "very" does not appear to be in any way problematic per se. I suggest you rethink your assessment of what is happening here.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- netcraft 9y agojust wait till _the daily show_ and _last week tonight_ get a hold of this!
- JustinAiken 9y ago..then they'll finally be able to play audio of republicans contradicting themselves! :p
- calimac 9y agoYes!!! And video of democrats like maxine waters et al. speaking in coherent logical sentences.
- sidarape 9y agoNo need for that, they're already doing fine.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- divanvisagie 9y agoThat's the joke
- andy_ppp 9y agoWoah, reminds me of Total Recall for some reason... looks like a special effect from the 80s when actual speaking occurs, but it's very close!
- NTripleOne 9y agoOkay, so on an ever so slightly related note, I've always wondered this ever since I saw that movie as a kid. ...Is it normal to feel bad for the Johnnycab "driver" when Arnie destroys it?
- fokinsean 9y agoWoah that's kinda scary. What could we do to determine if a video is legitimate or not?
- volkk 9y agoMainly, practice critical thinking. Don't take anything at face value until it has been reconfirmed from many sources. At least that's what I do.
- loader 9y agoThe problem isn't about the ones who already critically think.
- mikeleeorg 9y agoThis is going to be increasingly key. And even then, it will be very difficult. Books like "Trust Me, I'm Lying" reveal the lengths at which deception can occur. Though this book discusses deception that starts at the textual level (e.g. blogs), it is inevitable that these tactics will be translated to the video level once the technology catches up. Also, "at face value" - Ha! ;)
- tdeck 9y agoI love critical thinking as much as the next person, but I always find statements like this to be smug and self-congratulatory cliches. Of course you take things at face value, we all do. Every waking hour we're getting new information and having to make sense of it, while still living our lives. It's not practical for anyone to pretend that every interaction can be rigorously confirmed and independently verified, which means proliferation of convenient, effective mechanisms for lying and deception should be of real concern to all of us. No one is such a great critical thinker that they're immune, and it's particularly dangerous when our few reliable avenues of verifying identity and provenance are about to be cut off.
- knowaveragejoe 9y agoTo my knowledge, both of these particular projects are still a ways away from being used in any practical sense, let alone succeed at deceiving anyone. You are right that we'll have to worry about this soon though. Likewise, verifying the identify of people we think we're talking to over video calls for example.
- anigbrowl 9y agoI would use this (the audio tech from the OP) for some edge cases in film production right now. It would also be easy to combine this with Twilio and a chatbot to scam people over the phone.
- nihonde 9y agoWithout a doubt, our concept of personal identity will be completely unreliable within a few generations. Forget about privacy--we will soon have literally no way to verify who we're talking to.
- proaralyst 9y agoCrypto would still work, and this tech isn't going to work face-to-face.
- anigbrowl 9y agoNeither will insulate you from a deception which you wish to perpetuate upon yourself, and identifying the latter is a trick that con artists specialize in.
- mkay581 9y agoNo different than now, right? Technically there is no way (practically, anyway) to identify someone you're talking to over the phone for instance.
- d33 9y agoIf you have privacy, faces or sounds might not matter as much as content does - if you have common secrets, you have a way to identify a person.
- forgotpwtomain 9y agoPelevin's novel 'Generation П' is a very interesting read on this kind of theme. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation_%22%D0%9F%22 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation_%22%D0%9F%22