3 ms·

For the newspaper, a 'deep fake' story sells better. For the executive who messed up, by using the 'deep fake' story, they become blameless. If they admit to a

For the newspaper, a 'deep fake' story sells better. For the executive who messed up, by using the 'deep fake' story, they become blameless. If they admit to a voice actor, they can be questioned for incompetence. Everyone wins, except those who care about the truth. The whole thing reminds me of: "The majority of men prefer delusion to truth. It soothes. It is easy to grasp. Above all, it fits more snugly than the truth into a universe of false appearances—of complex and irrational phenomena,” ― Friedrich Nietzsche, The Antichrist

thfuran 7y ago
>For the executive who messed up, by using the 'deep fake' story, they become blameless. If they admit to a voice actor, they can be questioned for incompetence I don't really see why the two should be considered any different.
- 4ntonius8lock 7y ago
  Because of one of Clarke's laws: > Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. The mostly tech illiterate boses and the unthinking masses can't really parse the deep fake story. For most, there's simply no basis of comparison even they wanted to expend the energy on system 2 thinking. But talk about voice actors and everyone knows someone who does imitations. So they will base their anecdotal experiences in judging the possibility of what happened. This also mostly comes from system 1 thinking, which is pleasant to do, since it removes uncertainty from the world. Edit: when thinking of deep fakes, it applies to me too. I don't know how advanced they CAN be. I'm sure some military has some amazing ones that aren't open to the public. It's a point that goes beyond my imagination and into a world of uncertainty.