3 ms·
Yes. But I think there is another way to look at this: You _don't_ need fancy people with a not so uncommon skill, you _only_ need a bit of computing power. Po
by numlock86 7y ago
Yes. But I think there is another way to look at this: You _don't_ need fancy people with a not so uncommon skill, you _only_ need a bit of computing power.
Point is: I totally agree! The entry level to fake something is really low. No matter the technical value or skills you bring to the table.
- saurik 7y agoBut the point of the comment being responded to--which I also think is a very important point that it feels like you missed--is this isn't some new issue, caused by computers. Zeitgeist: panic, "the concept of truth is being destroyed by advancements in computers!!!" OP: sigh, "no... you have always been able to trick people, such as with audio, using a trained voice actor" You: "but, even with audio, you can also trick people with fancy new computers!" Me: ?!?
- feanaro 7y agoThe OP seems as if he understood that, but his argument is that this new technology makes the costs significantly lower. The lowering of cost has a strong impact in itself. In other words, almost no one would have bothered seeking out and then paying a talented individual with a somewhat uncommon skill in the vast majority of cases. Once this kind of software is available for free and packaged in such a package that almost zero effort is needed in order to achieve the same effect, a significantly higher number of people will do it. So something important has changed. I agree that the alarmist stance is still unwarranted, though.