6 ms·
I'm not sure the prosecution part is as important as the public's image. The fact is that someone can ruin your life with a fake video, and the tools for doing
by Beaver117 7y ago
I'm not sure the prosecution part is as important as the public's image. The fact is that someone can ruin your life with a fake video, and the tools for doing so are becoming easier and faster to use. Regardless of if the court believes the video or not, your social and professional life could already be ruined by the time they view the video.
- gdubs 7y agoTo add to this, even if someone knows a video is fake, if it’s realistic enough then the image will persist. But perhaps the most damaging aspect of all this is the erosion of truth, in people’s general feeling that nothing can be trusted.
- daniel-cussen 7y agoYou can trust what you see in person, without screens.
- gdubs 7y agoWhich would be fine if we still lived in small tribes of hunter-gatherers, but we don’t.
- lozaning 7y agoI've seen many an up close magic trick in person that I've been unable to figure out. In person only prevents digital shenanigans, not _all_ shenanigans.
- theterriblestid 7y agoWait for augmented reality glasses to become a thing
- ryukafalz 7y ago>But perhaps the most damaging aspect of all this is the erosion of truth, in people’s general feeling that nothing can be trusted. Might this be an opportunity for crypto education? Digital signatures are pretty powerful.
- Nasrudith 7y agoNo. Adding cryptography to video recordings is the worst of both Canudos. It can verify sources but not the literal truth. All that would do is half-mirror society where any ole bullshit signed by the credible is accepted while man on the street police brutality or politicians making out with a 12 year old are called fake.