4 ms·

I create fake videos. Here’s why people even believe the obvious ones

23 points by Vaslo 7y ago

ionwake 7y ago
Any github repos so I can have a play?
ZeroGravitas 7y ago
This stuff is like spam but worse. It's like if someone else could send your money to a Nigerian prince, so you can't just defend yourself, you need to defend everyone, even the people who believe the prince and think you're trying to stop then getting rich.
kaushikt 7y ago
This is horrible. Are they news providers who call on these fake or say altered videos validating the source and truth?
- casion 7y ago
  The problem is the chain of truth. Maybe you can prove that someone said something, but not that they believe it or even if it's objectively true. Then you have disputes of validation. A party wanting to retract reality can present their own convincing fake and chain of custody of validation. It only take a few smart attacks on a central validator for the "attacker" to seed reasonable doubt. The real solution is to trust nothing and always be ready to admit that you may be incorrect (given sufficient rational evidence to your contrary).
  - sjiiehwba873 7y ago
    But thats what some of the bad actors want. For you to trust nothing. So even when you see real news, which portrays them in a bad light, you won't believe it. We need to put our trust in something. But be careful about what we trust. And always be prepared to change our minds when were proven wrong.
duskhacker 7y ago
> That fear is founded on the longstanding principle that seeing is believing. But it seems as though that old axiom may not be true anymore This was never true. First, one is not “seeing” a thing when it is witnessed through a medium. One is witnessing a representation, not the thing. Seeing in the axiom above means, for lack of a better term, “eyeballing”. Further, any magician will tell you that eyeballing something doesn’t mean you’re seeing what you think you’re seeing. I have a hard time relating to this whole “omg, deep fakes horrible” thing, I’m in my 50’s and I relate to the author’s son’s outlook more closely. I have a counter to that axiom from modified old country wisdom: “Don’t believe anything you hear and only half of what you eyeball”
ssivark 7y ago
Better to link to the original source: https://theconversation.com/i-create-manipulated-images-and-videos-but-quality-may-not-matter-much-120404 https://theconversation.com/i-create-manipulated-images-and-...
cbanek 7y ago
> But we’ve found that a key element of the battle between truth and propaganda has nothing to do with technology. It has to do with how people are much more likely to accept something if it confirms their beliefs. So true (and not just because I believed this before I read it).

23 points by Vaslo 7y ago

Any github repos so I can have a play?

This stuff is like spam but worse. It's like if someone else could send your money to a Nigerian prince, so you can't just defend yourself, you need to defend everyone, even the people who believe the prince and think you're trying to stop then getting rich.

kaushikt 7y ago

This is horrible. Are they news providers who call on these fake or say altered videos validating the source and truth?

casion 7y ago
The problem is the chain of truth. Maybe you can prove that someone said something, but not that they believe it or even if it's objectively true. Then you have disputes of validation. A party wanting to retract reality can present their own convincing fake and chain of custody of validation. It only take a few smart attacks on a central validator for the "attacker" to seed reasonable doubt. The real solution is to trust nothing and always be ready to admit that you may be incorrect (given sufficient rational evidence to your contrary).
- sjiiehwba873 7y ago
  But thats what some of the bad actors want. For you to trust nothing. So even when you see real news, which portrays them in a bad light, you won't believe it. We need to put our trust in something. But be careful about what we trust. And always be prepared to change our minds when were proven wrong.

duskhacker 7y ago

> That fear is founded on the longstanding principle that seeing is believing. But it seems as though that old axiom may not be true anymore This was never true. First, one is not “seeing” a thing when it is witnessed through a medium. One is witnessing a representation, not the thing. Seeing in the axiom above means, for lack of a better term, “eyeballing”. Further, any magician will tell you that eyeballing something doesn’t mean you’re seeing what you think you’re seeing. I have a hard time relating to this whole “omg, deep fakes horrible” thing, I’m in my 50’s and I relate to the author’s son’s outlook more closely. I have a counter to that axiom from modified old country wisdom: “Don’t believe anything you hear and only half of what you eyeball”

ssivark 7y ago

Better to link to the original source: https://theconversation.com/i-create-manipulated-images-and-videos-but-quality-may-not-matter-much-120404 https://theconversation.com/i-create-manipulated-images-and-...

cbanek 7y ago

> But we’ve found that a key element of the battle between truth and propaganda has nothing to do with technology. It has to do with how people are much more likely to accept something if it confirms their beliefs. So true (and not just because I believed this before I read it).