3 ms·

I have a feeling there will always be a way to detect trace footprints of a 'fake' but assuming the technology is perfected, what is the best way to verify that

by mentos 8y ago

I have a feeling there will always be a way to detect trace footprints of a 'fake' but assuming the technology is perfected, what is the best way to verify that a Deepfake video is not you without analyzing the video? Thinking on this I feel like the future might require that we record our every move via some sort of verified GPS service so that you can corroborate your whereabouts. Maybe their service comes with a video recording device that can show no, 'at this date + time client was at a McDonalds drive through at 41°24'12.2"N 2°10'26.5"E here is a 452 second video of their engagement' which would overlap the supposed Deepfake timeline/video Thoughts? I imagine if the service is publicly trusted/credible then it would not need to expose the actual details of the client's whereabouts, it could just issue a true/false verification on a Deepfake based on the data held privately.

badosu 8y ago
Perhaps in the future there will be a step to edit videos with human oriented operations to remove artifacts?
cpitman 8y ago
I imagine it would work the same as any other information today, like press releases. Who is the source? Where did they get it from? Do I have any reason to doubt them? Ie, the end of "trusting" videos from unknown sources with unknown reputations and agendas.
14 8y ago
Have definitely thought about this type of situation. We have the technology that you could do it, even mostly off line as storage is cheap enough a person could take a go pro and have it running at all times. I like the gps stuff but think people don't like being tracked so that wouldn't work. So instead of a service this all has to be done locally on the device so the person ultimately has control. We don't need to give out the information unless there is a reason.
jobigoud 8y ago
For anyone wondering, these are the coordinates of the Sagrada Familia, and yes there is a McDonalds across the street.
Nasrudith 8y ago
The best way is probably corroborative physical evidence similar to dissecting testimony. Reminds me of the MOVE lawsuit where there were claims that people inside the compound were shooting at firefighters as the reason they pulled back. There was zero forensic proof of such encounter. Similarly if one deepfakes a clip of say George W. Bush shooting Bill Clinton in the head the fact he is alive and uninjured is proof that it is fake regardless of how sophisticated the fakery. But those are old fashioned legwork solutions. Depending on how divergent the algorithms are and how 'hand-done' they are I think a good intermediary measure would be to attempt to replicate it from scratch from other sources as itself a proof of insufficient proof. If you can take a DMV driver's license photo or other publicly available footage of your client, a scene of a robbery from a surveillance camera and put together something that looks exactly like the supposed evidence made by someone who was given only a loose description of the event you basically have proof that it is either fake or easily frameable in the same sense that a random diary that says "I am the zodiac killer - Ted Cruz" isn't admissible evidence.

by mentos 8y ago

badosu 8y ago

Perhaps in the future there will be a step to edit videos with human oriented operations to remove artifacts?

cpitman 8y ago

I imagine it would work the same as any other information today, like press releases. Who is the source? Where did they get it from? Do I have any reason to doubt them? Ie, the end of "trusting" videos from unknown sources with unknown reputations and agendas.

14 8y ago

Have definitely thought about this type of situation. We have the technology that you could do it, even mostly off line as storage is cheap enough a person could take a go pro and have it running at all times. I like the gps stuff but think people don't like being tracked so that wouldn't work. So instead of a service this all has to be done locally on the device so the person ultimately has control. We don't need to give out the information unless there is a reason.

jobigoud 8y ago

For anyone wondering, these are the coordinates of the Sagrada Familia, and yes there is a McDonalds across the street.

Nasrudith 8y ago

The best way is probably corroborative physical evidence similar to dissecting testimony. Reminds me of the MOVE lawsuit where there were claims that people inside the compound were shooting at firefighters as the reason they pulled back. There was zero forensic proof of such encounter. Similarly if one deepfakes a clip of say George W. Bush shooting Bill Clinton in the head the fact he is alive and uninjured is proof that it is fake regardless of how sophisticated the fakery. But those are old fashioned legwork solutions. Depending on how divergent the algorithms are and how 'hand-done' they are I think a good intermediary measure would be to attempt to replicate it from scratch from other sources as itself a proof of insufficient proof. If you can take a DMV driver's license photo or other publicly available footage of your client, a scene of a robbery from a surveillance camera and put together something that looks exactly like the supposed evidence made by someone who was given only a loose description of the event you basically have proof that it is either fake or easily frameable in the same sense that a random diary that says "I am the zodiac killer - Ted Cruz" isn't admissible evidence.