4 ms·
The real danger I see is if/when deepfake-like tech becomes so ubiquitous that we no longer believe anything we see on video. What will that mean for surveilla
by zupreme 7y ago
The real danger I see is if/when deepfake-like tech becomes so ubiquitous that we no longer believe anything we see on video.
What will that mean for surveillance evidence? What will that mean for police brutality videos? What will it mean for rape/harassment/assault/stalking/etc videos?
By spreading this tech, which seems inevitable now, we roll back the protective aspects of video/film by decades, if not more.
- mhandley 7y agoPresumably there will be a legal requirement that video used as evidence is digitally signed by the camera, using tamper-proof hardware and a certificate chain back to a certified manufacturer. Anything less will just be contested in court, and thrown out.
- zupreme 7y agoI like the digital signature aspect. But would a phone camera be considered “tamper proof”? What camera would, that a civilian could readily buy?