3 ms·

So— there is a way to defeat this, which is to track down the original source video that was modified to match, but yeah, in a few years this is going to wreak

So— there is a way to defeat this, which is to track down the original source video that was modified to match, but yeah, in a few years this is going to wreak havoc on news reporting, intelligence, and the justice system. People are going to have their lives destroyed by intelligence services over this.

Barrin92 9y ago
>People are going to have their lives destroyed by intelligence services over this. there's a paradoxical effect to it though. If these technologies become so pervasive that they're not distinguishable from real footage they'll lose their entire value, especially in a legal case. If you could arbitrarily create fake dna tests there'd be no point to pay attention to the results.
- polyomino 9y ago
  You’d think so wouldn’t you. AFAIK some courts still accept lie detectors as testimony.
  - Barrin92 9y ago
    I didn't actually know that countries are still using them. I thought they were a thing out of 80s American crime films. Consider me surprised
    - 77pt77 9y ago
      I think they are quite common in Israel. https://www.timesofisrael.com/when-a-job-interview-turns-into-an-interrogation/ https://www.timesofisrael.com/when-a-job-interview-turns-int... > In Israel, too, the results of a polygraph test are inadmissible in criminal court but in civil court they are fair game if the person being tested agrees to it in advance.
  - mastax 9y ago
    Every(?) court accepts eyewitness testimony which is being recognized more and more as being very unreliable. Even ignoring the problem with eyewitnesses lying (or jurors falsely believing they are lying), memory is much less reliable than people feel that it is. It's very easy for false information to become associated with a memory where it resides forever after. Additionally, when remembering something the brain is happy to take the essence of something and fill in the specifics - it's as much imagination as it is recall - and it happens so fluidly it's hard to tell what you actually remember. For an illustration of the second point, try to recall your earliest memory. For me, the first time someone asked me that question I had an answer which was then fixed in my brain as "my first memory". If I try to recall the memory, it's very apparent that there's nothing real left. It's just a memory of a memory, and any specifics are imagined extrapolations of home video and photos which I can actually remember. When this happens for more recent memories, the process is much more transparent.
- whatshisface 9y ago
  Could you prime juries for unfriendly imagination by showing them inadmissible "simulations" of the crime?
  - Spivak 9y ago
    If a judge catches you doing this, i.e. it wasn't an honest mistake, you might find yourself in front of a new jury. Check out [1] for a discussion of current 'allowable' priming practices. Courts and legal scholars aren't blind to these tricks. [1] https://ilr.law.uiowa.edu/print/volume-101-issue-2/the-investigation-narrative-an-argument-for-limiting-prosecution-evidence/ https://ilr.law.uiowa.edu/print/volume-101-issue-2/the-inves...
Mashimo 9y ago
>So— there is a way to defeat this, which is to track down the original source video that was modified to match, Use an look-alike actor to make your own video. Then faceswap with deepfake. Sound can be taken from Adobe Voco. But you need a thousands of pictures and hours of audio for this to work. And it's yet probably stil recognizable. But in a few year, this can be quite scary.

Barrin92 9y ago

>People are going to have their lives destroyed by intelligence services over this. there's a paradoxical effect to it though. If these technologies become so pervasive that they're not distinguishable from real footage they'll lose their entire value, especially in a legal case. If you could arbitrarily create fake dna tests there'd be no point to pay attention to the results.

polyomino 9y ago
You’d think so wouldn’t you. AFAIK some courts still accept lie detectors as testimony.
- Barrin92 9y ago
  I didn't actually know that countries are still using them. I thought they were a thing out of 80s American crime films. Consider me surprised
  - 77pt77 9y ago
    I think they are quite common in Israel. https://www.timesofisrael.com/when-a-job-interview-turns-into-an-interrogation/ https://www.timesofisrael.com/when-a-job-interview-turns-int... > In Israel, too, the results of a polygraph test are inadmissible in criminal court but in civil court they are fair game if the person being tested agrees to it in advance.
- mastax 9y ago
  Every(?) court accepts eyewitness testimony which is being recognized more and more as being very unreliable. Even ignoring the problem with eyewitnesses lying (or jurors falsely believing they are lying), memory is much less reliable than people feel that it is. It's very easy for false information to become associated with a memory where it resides forever after. Additionally, when remembering something the brain is happy to take the essence of something and fill in the specifics - it's as much imagination as it is recall - and it happens so fluidly it's hard to tell what you actually remember. For an illustration of the second point, try to recall your earliest memory. For me, the first time someone asked me that question I had an answer which was then fixed in my brain as "my first memory". If I try to recall the memory, it's very apparent that there's nothing real left. It's just a memory of a memory, and any specifics are imagined extrapolations of home video and photos which I can actually remember. When this happens for more recent memories, the process is much more transparent.
whatshisface 9y ago
Could you prime juries for unfriendly imagination by showing them inadmissible "simulations" of the crime?
- Spivak 9y ago
  If a judge catches you doing this, i.e. it wasn't an honest mistake, you might find yourself in front of a new jury. Check out [1] for a discussion of current 'allowable' priming practices. Courts and legal scholars aren't blind to these tricks. [1] https://ilr.law.uiowa.edu/print/volume-101-issue-2/the-investigation-narrative-an-argument-for-limiting-prosecution-evidence/ https://ilr.law.uiowa.edu/print/volume-101-issue-2/the-inves...

Mashimo 9y ago

>So— there is a way to defeat this, which is to track down the original source video that was modified to match, Use an look-alike actor to make your own video. Then faceswap with deepfake. Sound can be taken from Adobe Voco. But you need a thousands of pictures and hours of audio for this to work. And it's yet probably stil recognizable. But in a few year, this can be quite scary.