4 ms·

Yeah, this is why I'm not worried one iota about deepfakes. Say what you will about fake news, but blantant lies like a faked video or image generally does not

by tw1010 8y ago

Yeah, this is why I'm not worried one iota about deepfakes. Say what you will about fake news, but blantant lies like a faked video or image generally does not get through journalistic filters. Something big like a fake video of a celebrity or a president would very unlikely be published (and if it grew viral through some disingenuous source, its spread would be severely dampened by trusted newssites warning the public not to believe it). I mean just look at the subsequent backlash after oobah butler's pranks. Sure, his prank fooled the news, but it's effects were totally nil in the long-term steady state.

jcoffland 8y ago
What about the likely fake Chinese spy chip news put out recently by Blomberg? The pictures of the spy chip that this supposedly reputable news agency plastered all over the Internet have been shown to be nothing more than a bog standard filter chip they found on Mouser Electronics' website. Fake news is not automatically distinguishable from real news regardless of the source.
chrisco255 8y ago
You realize that a very small minority of the overall population even watches news or pays much attention to it, right? A well-timed fake video could cause a riot, erode trust in institutions, antagonize relationships, and disrupt the social fabric. It will become even more apparent when the population is primed to believe it, pick your hot button issue of the day and some significant portion of the population would absolutely believe a fake video depicting the opposing party doing something horrible, without pausing to reflect. Even seemingly harmless caricatures, like Tina Fey's infamous SNL skit of Sarah Palin ("I can see Russia from my house"), have a long term affect on people's perception of reality: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/59838/1/USAPP_Blog_In_politics_caricatures_can_become_facts_Cacciatore.pdf http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/59838/1/USAPP_Blog_In_politics_cari... In that paper a survey found that 7 in 10 Americans believed that Palin actually said that. The mass production of deep fakes will have a deep and profound impact on society. I'm not keen on where this is heading.
CM30 8y ago
Depends how good the journalistic filters are. Would these deepfakes get through the ones for the New York Times or BBC or Telegraph? Maybe not, but I have no doubt they'd fool the tabloid papers, especially given how low the standards are for stuff like the Sun/Daily Mirror/Daily Star/etc. They'd also likely fool quite a few specialist sites too, especially given the likes of the gaming press have very low standards for credible sources or evidence. People on Twitter have fooled them with blurry cellphone photos on a semi regular basis. But it definitely depends on the news source and how thorough they are with verifying stories.
- tw1010 8y ago
  Sure, but I still don't see why we should be hysterically scared about its development since I think photoshopped images would have made the same damage a long time ago if the system was really that fragile. The fact that photoshopped images aren't nearly as big a threat as what we're expecting deepfakes to be makes me think that however the set of amplifiers and filters are configured (and I'll admit that I don't have a full understanding of it all), it's likely that they're sufficient to not make society collapse once the technology has matured. Photoshopped images are a sort of "trial balloon" which has already proven that the system is pretty dang robust, that's my thesis.
nikk1 8y ago
You're right, that using deepfakes would be difficult to manipulate the general public with. There are plenty of dangerous cases where deepfakes could be effective, especially in the military or in business. The article sites two examples: what if you see satellite images of a country mobilizing or testing nuclear weapons? What if someone synthesized sensor measurements? Another example I could think of is a highly sophisticated spearphising attack. What if someone impersonated a boss's voice over the phone? What kind social engineering/manipulation could that type of adversary get away with?

by tw1010 8y ago

jcoffland 8y ago

What about the likely fake Chinese spy chip news put out recently by Blomberg? The pictures of the spy chip that this supposedly reputable news agency plastered all over the Internet have been shown to be nothing more than a bog standard filter chip they found on Mouser Electronics' website. Fake news is not automatically distinguishable from real news regardless of the source.

chrisco255 8y ago

You realize that a very small minority of the overall population even watches news or pays much attention to it, right? A well-timed fake video could cause a riot, erode trust in institutions, antagonize relationships, and disrupt the social fabric. It will become even more apparent when the population is primed to believe it, pick your hot button issue of the day and some significant portion of the population would absolutely believe a fake video depicting the opposing party doing something horrible, without pausing to reflect. Even seemingly harmless caricatures, like Tina Fey's infamous SNL skit of Sarah Palin ("I can see Russia from my house"), have a long term affect on people's perception of reality: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/59838/1/USAPP_Blog_In_politics_caricatures_can_become_facts_Cacciatore.pdf http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/59838/1/USAPP_Blog_In_politics_cari... In that paper a survey found that 7 in 10 Americans believed that Palin actually said that. The mass production of deep fakes will have a deep and profound impact on society. I'm not keen on where this is heading.

CM30 8y ago

Depends how good the journalistic filters are. Would these deepfakes get through the ones for the New York Times or BBC or Telegraph? Maybe not, but I have no doubt they'd fool the tabloid papers, especially given how low the standards are for stuff like the Sun/Daily Mirror/Daily Star/etc. They'd also likely fool quite a few specialist sites too, especially given the likes of the gaming press have very low standards for credible sources or evidence. People on Twitter have fooled them with blurry cellphone photos on a semi regular basis. But it definitely depends on the news source and how thorough they are with verifying stories.

tw1010 8y ago
Sure, but I still don't see why we should be hysterically scared about its development since I think photoshopped images would have made the same damage a long time ago if the system was really that fragile. The fact that photoshopped images aren't nearly as big a threat as what we're expecting deepfakes to be makes me think that however the set of amplifiers and filters are configured (and I'll admit that I don't have a full understanding of it all), it's likely that they're sufficient to not make society collapse once the technology has matured. Photoshopped images are a sort of "trial balloon" which has already proven that the system is pretty dang robust, that's my thesis.

nikk1 8y ago

You're right, that using deepfakes would be difficult to manipulate the general public with. There are plenty of dangerous cases where deepfakes could be effective, especially in the military or in business. The article sites two examples: what if you see satellite images of a country mobilizing or testing nuclear weapons? What if someone synthesized sensor measurements? Another example I could think of is a highly sophisticated spearphising attack. What if someone impersonated a boss's voice over the phone? What kind social engineering/manipulation could that type of adversary get away with?