5 ms·

Here’s the video: https://moondisaster.org/film https://moondisaster.org/film Not bad but the audio doesn’t sound quite right.

ghaff 6y ago
The thing is that you know it's a fake and are looking for clues that it's a fake. But for many purposes, it doesn't matter if you can fool careful study or expert analysis, it matters whether you can fool a quick glance from someone already predisposed to believe the contents who will retweet or share on facebook and move on.
- LinuxBender 6y ago
  I agree. To add to this, I would suggest that this is good feedback to the people creating these and they will just see it as a challenge and / or enhancement request. Perhaps in time, even the best forensics won't be able to distinguish the difference. Maybe.
- najarvg 6y ago
  Well said. Imagine a similar deepfake with a Nixon "confession" about having to stage the moon landing to make America look superior. You now suddenly have the next viral facebook or whatsapp forward for conspiracy theorists who are fully convinced of their beliefs.
  - rightbyte 6y ago
    Ye but it has been doable with modern movie production technology for some time without any fancy AI. The biggest difference is the price drop of it?
    - dogma1138 6y ago
      Accessibility and scalability, get a few trained models and you not only can produce the original deepfake but also a lot of convincing identities and accounts to spread it around. This is the same issue as RC va Drones, you could’ve strapped a pound of C4 to an RC flyer for decades but it was never as easy to do as with drones today, the skills, availability and reliability of consumer drones even the cheapest ones from Aliexpress allowed non-state actors to weaponize them with ease.
    - gowld 6y ago
      Not just price drop. Also co-conspirator drop, to reduce the number of helpers you need to create the artifact. But, overall, "deep fake" isn't a critical waterfall aspect. It one piece of the overall trend toward fake archaeology. Fakeaelogy? Farkchaeology?
      - CamperBob2 6y ago
        The term "simulation" comes to mind as a description of the emerging art and science of ultra-realistic bullshit generation. From Baudrillard (https://cla.purdue.edu/academic/english/theory/postmodernism/terms/simulacrum.html https://cla.purdue.edu/academic/english/theory/postmodernism...): "Simulation is no longer that of a territory, a referential being, or a substance. It is the generation by models of a real without origin or reality: a hyperreal.... It is no longer a question of imitation, nor duplication, nor even parody. It is a question of substituting the signs of the real for the real."
        lioeters 6y ago
        > Hyperreality, in semiotics and postmodernism, is an inability of consciousness to distinguish reality from a simulation of reality, especially in technologically advanced postmodern societies. > Hyperreality is seen as a condition in which what is real and what is fiction are seamlessly blended together so that there is no clear distinction between where one ends and the other begins. > "The authentic fake." – Umberto Eco
    - throwaway0a5e 6y ago
      >The biggest difference is the price drop of it? Yeah pretty much. The lords are worried that the peasants can afford repeating firearms now and the well to do peasants are worried that the status quo might be upset.
  - Nasrudith 6y ago
    You could do that right now with a Nixon impersonator and no deepfakes. You don't need evidence but a pretext for what people already want to believe.
- baddox 6y ago
  I think it’s already clear that a fake video isn’t necessary for people to believe something they already want to believe. You could just distribute a badly-compressed screenshot of an unrelated video with a caption explaining the fake story behind the video. I think that would be more than enough, and I doubt a full faked video would provide much marginal utility.
  - idrios 6y ago
    Don't forget to add a few comments from shill accounts saying "omg so true" to add to the authenticity
x3n0ph3n3 6y ago
You can see a seem between the upper and lower half of the face just above the level of the nostrils.
ponker 6y ago
The thing is that five years ago this stuff did not exist full stop. Five years from now it's going to be massively better. And societal institutions just don't respond to external shocks in five years, modern governance institutions are just not wired for it (e.g. the US Senate has six-year terms, Supreme Court terms are 30-40 years). So it's basically a complete inevitability that society will not be able to handle this, and in four years we'll probably see an election where a deepfaked video massively swings public sentiment (e.g. one of the candidates saying the n-word or something), and eight years from now, an authentic video of a candidate actively conspiring to commit a crime will be dismissed as a "deepfake" because of the experiences of four years earlier. How is a society governed when Western Englightenment ideals of logic and reason have failed due to the inability to have any axiomatic truths? The way that societies were governed before the Englightenment -- religious fundamentalism and "might makes right."

ghaff 6y ago

The thing is that you know it's a fake and are looking for clues that it's a fake. But for many purposes, it doesn't matter if you can fool careful study or expert analysis, it matters whether you can fool a quick glance from someone already predisposed to believe the contents who will retweet or share on facebook and move on.

LinuxBender 6y ago
I agree. To add to this, I would suggest that this is good feedback to the people creating these and they will just see it as a challenge and / or enhancement request. Perhaps in time, even the best forensics won't be able to distinguish the difference. Maybe.
najarvg 6y ago
Well said. Imagine a similar deepfake with a Nixon "confession" about having to stage the moon landing to make America look superior. You now suddenly have the next viral facebook or whatsapp forward for conspiracy theorists who are fully convinced of their beliefs.
- rightbyte 6y ago
  Ye but it has been doable with modern movie production technology for some time without any fancy AI. The biggest difference is the price drop of it?
  - dogma1138 6y ago
    Accessibility and scalability, get a few trained models and you not only can produce the original deepfake but also a lot of convincing identities and accounts to spread it around. This is the same issue as RC va Drones, you could’ve strapped a pound of C4 to an RC flyer for decades but it was never as easy to do as with drones today, the skills, availability and reliability of consumer drones even the cheapest ones from Aliexpress allowed non-state actors to weaponize them with ease.
  - gowld 6y ago
    Not just price drop. Also co-conspirator drop, to reduce the number of helpers you need to create the artifact. But, overall, "deep fake" isn't a critical waterfall aspect. It one piece of the overall trend toward fake archaeology. Fakeaelogy? Farkchaeology?
    - CamperBob2 6y ago
      The term "simulation" comes to mind as a description of the emerging art and science of ultra-realistic bullshit generation. From Baudrillard (https://cla.purdue.edu/academic/english/theory/postmodernism/terms/simulacrum.html https://cla.purdue.edu/academic/english/theory/postmodernism...): "Simulation is no longer that of a territory, a referential being, or a substance. It is the generation by models of a real without origin or reality: a hyperreal.... It is no longer a question of imitation, nor duplication, nor even parody. It is a question of substituting the signs of the real for the real."
      - lioeters 6y ago
        > Hyperreality, in semiotics and postmodernism, is an inability of consciousness to distinguish reality from a simulation of reality, especially in technologically advanced postmodern societies. > Hyperreality is seen as a condition in which what is real and what is fiction are seamlessly blended together so that there is no clear distinction between where one ends and the other begins. > "The authentic fake." – Umberto Eco
  - throwaway0a5e 6y ago
    >The biggest difference is the price drop of it? Yeah pretty much. The lords are worried that the peasants can afford repeating firearms now and the well to do peasants are worried that the status quo might be upset.
- Nasrudith 6y ago
  You could do that right now with a Nixon impersonator and no deepfakes. You don't need evidence but a pretext for what people already want to believe.
baddox 6y ago
I think it’s already clear that a fake video isn’t necessary for people to believe something they already want to believe. You could just distribute a badly-compressed screenshot of an unrelated video with a caption explaining the fake story behind the video. I think that would be more than enough, and I doubt a full faked video would provide much marginal utility.
- idrios 6y ago
  Don't forget to add a few comments from shill accounts saying "omg so true" to add to the authenticity

x3n0ph3n3 6y ago

You can see a seem between the upper and lower half of the face just above the level of the nostrils.

ponker 6y ago

The thing is that five years ago this stuff did not exist full stop. Five years from now it's going to be massively better. And societal institutions just don't respond to external shocks in five years, modern governance institutions are just not wired for it (e.g. the US Senate has six-year terms, Supreme Court terms are 30-40 years). So it's basically a complete inevitability that society will not be able to handle this, and in four years we'll probably see an election where a deepfaked video massively swings public sentiment (e.g. one of the candidates saying the n-word or something), and eight years from now, an authentic video of a candidate actively conspiring to commit a crime will be dismissed as a "deepfake" because of the experiences of four years earlier. How is a society governed when Western Englightenment ideals of logic and reason have failed due to the inability to have any axiomatic truths? The way that societies were governed before the Englightenment -- religious fundamentalism and "might makes right."