4 ms·

All of these things make it easier to mass-produce bullshit at low cost. I'm pretty sure I know people who have been convinced by meme quotes. A headshot of a

All of these things make it easier to mass-produce bullshit at low cost. I'm pretty sure I know people who have been convinced by meme quotes. A headshot of a politician they don't like, with text overlaid, which they never said. People are outraged! And never bother to inspect the source. Anything that makes it easier to lie about what someone said or did, or makes it harder to disprove... They're all politically weaponized, already. Look at the "drunk pelosi" video.

mistermann 7y ago
> I'm pretty sure I know people who have been convinced by meme quotes. A headshot of a politician they don't like, with text overlaid, which they never said. People are outraged! And never bother to inspect the source. I really wonder which type of meme has the most influence on average, straightforward and outright lies like the one you've noted, or the more subtle, subversive social commentary style. I'm a big fan of the latter, I think they're very interesting and underappreciated. For example, this one - nothing more than a simple screenshot of Twitter, but to me this seems very persuasive: http://magaimg.net/img/80rb.jpg http://magaimg.net/img/80rb.jpg Pointing out hypocritical grandstanding: https://i.redd.it/74n4exoy2g131.jpg https://i.redd.it/74n4exoy2g131.jpg Media bias: https://i.redd.it/gtrq4xgemtx21.jpg https://i.redd.it/gtrq4xgemtx21.jpg If Biden runs will be interesting to see how much airplay this meme will get: https://i.imgur.com/tqzGS6E.mp4 https://i.imgur.com/tqzGS6E.mp4 Laughing at the silliness of popular narratives: https://i.redd.it/a9wrex3ijc231.jpg https://i.redd.it/a9wrex3ijc231.jpg Just for a laugh: https://i.redd.it/i5bvml5m92131.jpg https://i.redd.it/i5bvml5m92131.jpg Laughing at logical inconsistency: https://i.redd.it/rp9ydf0s88y21.jpg https://i.redd.it/rp9ydf0s88y21.jpg An interesting way of looking at Brexit: https://i.redd.it/cs6o72p3dp031.png https://i.redd.it/cs6o72p3dp031.png Historical hypocrisy on border control: https://i.redd.it/983sm9wjley21.png https://i.redd.it/983sm9wjley21.png All of these are from t_d so obviously one-sided, I'm sure a similarly impressive collection from the other perspective could easily be assembled, and it's not that uncommon to encounter otherwise intelligent people who have obviously had their beliefs shaped by those memes.
- VikingCoder 7y ago
  I remember thinking that computer networks would connect people and make the world a better place. I'm now just about ready to unplug the whole thing and launch it at the sun. To your point, there are people who are persuaded by assertions. I personally find it gets even more entrenched when people believe they have seen the evidence with their own eyes. When they see a doctored photo, clip out of context, etc. I'm reminded of the gun / water context photo: https://toinformistoinfluence.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/198398_424402037583038_642096662_n.jpg https://toinformistoinfluence.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/19...
  - mistermann 7y ago
    It is pretty hard to be optimistic about this whole mess sometimes, but then on the other hand, just as negativity and hate spreads so quickly, might it be possible for positivity and love to do the same, some day? I think so. Oh ya I love that picture, was trying to find it not that long ago with no luck. It does a brilliant job communicating how powerful propaganda can be.
    - mistermann 7y ago
      Downvotes on hope for the spread of positivity and love? Meme magic is powerful indeed.
- anigbrowl 7y ago
  Tacking a disclaimer on the end isn't sufficient to justify posting so much flamebait.
  - mistermann 7y ago
    You do realize the topic of discussion in this thread, right?
    - anigbrowl 7y ago
      Just as you realize I was suggesting an oversupply of examples.
fspeech 7y ago
This may actually make brand names in media valuable again.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
babypuncher 7y ago
The thing is deepfakes don't really make this easier. They are a lot of work to produce and ultimately aren't a whole lot more effective than a good old fashioned photoshop or crappy meme.
- VikingCoder 7y ago
  The research demonstrations I've seen are sufficiently terrifying. I believe we'll have something like http://www.xtranormal.com/ http://www.xtranormal.com/ for major political figures within two years, producing deepfakes that are sufficiently realistic that I have several relatives who will be tricked by them. Do you not know people who will be fooled?
  - mrandish 7y ago
    People's eyes and ears may be fooled by a video but as this capability becomes widespread, which it certainly will, I'm not so sure that many people will be deceived in the long-run. Technology is evolving but not in a vacuum, society's reactions also evolve in response. Today, many people interpret video to be "evidence" but those same people can interpret a photo to be a "claim" or perhaps some form of lower-confidence indication. Before photo manipulation was commonly known, I think photos were in a similar place as video - more trusted. Based on history, it's reasonable to expect video may follow a similar trajectory as photos to becoming less trusted in situations where it matters. So, what happens when media types which were previously more trusted as evidence become less trusted? The same things that happened with print, audio and photos. Viewers will evaluate external cues such as the reputation of the publisher and corroborating evidence. The leading indicators that we should suspect deception will likely be similar. For example, how divergent the behavior depicted is from expectation, how contentious the surrounding context is and the existence of parties with an interest in creating such a deception. This effect already happens with manipulation of intent through tricky video editing, for example deleting the rest of a reply to a question or even swapping in an alternate question. In the last decade I'd say the typical person is far more aware this is possible. So, in the near-term there may be some successful deception but in the long-term I expect the potential value of creating such deceptions will diminish and we'll arrive at a new "normal" much like we have now. The biggest long-term impact may be false claims of "doctored video!" from those who were actually caught on video doing something they didn't want seen by others. But as we already see now, those pre-disposed to believe whatever is shown is false will search for indications it's doctored. Those pre-disposed to believe whatever is shown is true will search for indications it's just more confirmation of what what they already suspected. Either way, the existing reputation of the person shown, the distribution source and the pre-existing knowledge of viewers will likely be more determinitive than the media itself.
AJ007 7y ago
Politicians say outrageous things all of the time. The ones that don’t, usually have trouble raising money much less winning elections.
ehsankia 7y ago
Isn't the drunk pelosi video literally just slowed down audio? If anything, it proves that we don't really need these insanely advanced machine learning techniques to make bullshit. Something as basic as slowing down a video 20% will do just fine in misleading people.
TravelAndFood 7y ago
Do these transformations leave any discrepancy or signature in the video or audio that would be detectable by a machine? (So, tiny, tiny discrepancies might work.) Someone could make a browser plugin to alert the user when video/audio has a good chance of being fake.
- Faark 7y ago
  If software can identify it as fake, another can be improved till that isn't the case anymore. This is actually being used, search Generative Adversarial Network for more info and background.

mistermann 7y ago

> I'm pretty sure I know people who have been convinced by meme quotes. A headshot of a politician they don't like, with text overlaid, which they never said. People are outraged! And never bother to inspect the source. I really wonder which type of meme has the most influence on average, straightforward and outright lies like the one you've noted, or the more subtle, subversive social commentary style. I'm a big fan of the latter, I think they're very interesting and underappreciated. For example, this one - nothing more than a simple screenshot of Twitter, but to me this seems very persuasive: http://magaimg.net/img/80rb.jpg http://magaimg.net/img/80rb.jpg Pointing out hypocritical grandstanding: https://i.redd.it/74n4exoy2g131.jpg https://i.redd.it/74n4exoy2g131.jpg Media bias: https://i.redd.it/gtrq4xgemtx21.jpg https://i.redd.it/gtrq4xgemtx21.jpg If Biden runs will be interesting to see how much airplay this meme will get: https://i.imgur.com/tqzGS6E.mp4 https://i.imgur.com/tqzGS6E.mp4 Laughing at the silliness of popular narratives: https://i.redd.it/a9wrex3ijc231.jpg https://i.redd.it/a9wrex3ijc231.jpg Just for a laugh: https://i.redd.it/i5bvml5m92131.jpg https://i.redd.it/i5bvml5m92131.jpg Laughing at logical inconsistency: https://i.redd.it/rp9ydf0s88y21.jpg https://i.redd.it/rp9ydf0s88y21.jpg An interesting way of looking at Brexit: https://i.redd.it/cs6o72p3dp031.png https://i.redd.it/cs6o72p3dp031.png Historical hypocrisy on border control: https://i.redd.it/983sm9wjley21.png https://i.redd.it/983sm9wjley21.png All of these are from t_d so obviously one-sided, I'm sure a similarly impressive collection from the other perspective could easily be assembled, and it's not that uncommon to encounter otherwise intelligent people who have obviously had their beliefs shaped by those memes.

VikingCoder 7y ago
I remember thinking that computer networks would connect people and make the world a better place. I'm now just about ready to unplug the whole thing and launch it at the sun. To your point, there are people who are persuaded by assertions. I personally find it gets even more entrenched when people believe they have seen the evidence with their own eyes. When they see a doctored photo, clip out of context, etc. I'm reminded of the gun / water context photo: https://toinformistoinfluence.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/198398_424402037583038_642096662_n.jpg https://toinformistoinfluence.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/19...
- mistermann 7y ago
  It is pretty hard to be optimistic about this whole mess sometimes, but then on the other hand, just as negativity and hate spreads so quickly, might it be possible for positivity and love to do the same, some day? I think so. Oh ya I love that picture, was trying to find it not that long ago with no luck. It does a brilliant job communicating how powerful propaganda can be.
  - mistermann 7y ago
    Downvotes on hope for the spread of positivity and love? Meme magic is powerful indeed.
anigbrowl 7y ago
Tacking a disclaimer on the end isn't sufficient to justify posting so much flamebait.
- mistermann 7y ago
  You do realize the topic of discussion in this thread, right?
  - anigbrowl 7y ago
    Just as you realize I was suggesting an oversupply of examples.

fspeech 7y ago

This may actually make brand names in media valuable again.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

babypuncher 7y ago

The thing is deepfakes don't really make this easier. They are a lot of work to produce and ultimately aren't a whole lot more effective than a good old fashioned photoshop or crappy meme.

VikingCoder 7y ago
The research demonstrations I've seen are sufficiently terrifying. I believe we'll have something like http://www.xtranormal.com/ http://www.xtranormal.com/ for major political figures within two years, producing deepfakes that are sufficiently realistic that I have several relatives who will be tricked by them. Do you not know people who will be fooled?
- mrandish 7y ago
  People's eyes and ears may be fooled by a video but as this capability becomes widespread, which it certainly will, I'm not so sure that many people will be deceived in the long-run. Technology is evolving but not in a vacuum, society's reactions also evolve in response. Today, many people interpret video to be "evidence" but those same people can interpret a photo to be a "claim" or perhaps some form of lower-confidence indication. Before photo manipulation was commonly known, I think photos were in a similar place as video - more trusted. Based on history, it's reasonable to expect video may follow a similar trajectory as photos to becoming less trusted in situations where it matters. So, what happens when media types which were previously more trusted as evidence become less trusted? The same things that happened with print, audio and photos. Viewers will evaluate external cues such as the reputation of the publisher and corroborating evidence. The leading indicators that we should suspect deception will likely be similar. For example, how divergent the behavior depicted is from expectation, how contentious the surrounding context is and the existence of parties with an interest in creating such a deception. This effect already happens with manipulation of intent through tricky video editing, for example deleting the rest of a reply to a question or even swapping in an alternate question. In the last decade I'd say the typical person is far more aware this is possible. So, in the near-term there may be some successful deception but in the long-term I expect the potential value of creating such deceptions will diminish and we'll arrive at a new "normal" much like we have now. The biggest long-term impact may be false claims of "doctored video!" from those who were actually caught on video doing something they didn't want seen by others. But as we already see now, those pre-disposed to believe whatever is shown is false will search for indications it's doctored. Those pre-disposed to believe whatever is shown is true will search for indications it's just more confirmation of what what they already suspected. Either way, the existing reputation of the person shown, the distribution source and the pre-existing knowledge of viewers will likely be more determinitive than the media itself.

AJ007 7y ago

Politicians say outrageous things all of the time. The ones that don’t, usually have trouble raising money much less winning elections.

ehsankia 7y ago

Isn't the drunk pelosi video literally just slowed down audio? If anything, it proves that we don't really need these insanely advanced machine learning techniques to make bullshit. Something as basic as slowing down a video 20% will do just fine in misleading people.

TravelAndFood 7y ago

Do these transformations leave any discrepancy or signature in the video or audio that would be detectable by a machine? (So, tiny, tiny discrepancies might work.) Someone could make a browser plugin to alert the user when video/audio has a good chance of being fake.

Faark 7y ago
If software can identify it as fake, another can be improved till that isn't the case anymore. This is actually being used, search Generative Adversarial Network for more info and background.