5 ms·

Now we can use this new AI to train another AI that can defeat it. And so continues the great cat vs mouse chase. I don't think this is a problem that is ever

Now we can use this new AI to train another AI that can defeat it. And so continues the great cat vs mouse chase. I don't think this is a problem that is ever going to be solved. Deep fakes will become more and more popular, and harder to detect.

IgorPartola 6y ago
I feel like it’s time to bring in Heinlein’s Fair Witness concept: https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Fair%20Witness https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Fair%20Witne... If you think about it, when we had relatively few journalists and their reputation was on the line with every story they wrote they in a way were fair witnesses. Since we have moved to a hybrid model of professional journalists and a huge caste of YouTubers, podcasters, bloggers, and twitters, it has become impossible to hold everyone to a high journalistic standard. At the same time Fox News has brought on an era of politicized news so the bias is now inherent. Maybe if we had a few hundred fair witnesses that offered a professional service we could have a way to verify facts. Then again, it’s one thing to have a fair witness present facts, it’s another to have that witness’s likeness be deep faked and broadcast all over the web saying something they didn’t actually say. Another solution may be regulatory: anyone broadcasting a deep fake with a huge disclaimer that it is a fake gets a 20% of their net worth fine. Draconian but I can see it working.
- ben_w 6y ago
  We need something, but Fair Witnesses seem both exploitable and unachievable given the way human memories work.
  - dvtrn 6y ago
    “Expert witnesses” then?
    - ben_w 6y ago
      “Expert” is a misused term, much like “exponential”. I see the value of the press as being as much of an intelligence agency as the combined CIA, NSA, and FBI, but serving the electorate and investigating all those with power — politicians, police, military, religious, business, and so on — so that the electorate can make informed decisions. I don’t know how to get there from here. Heck, I don’t even know if we’ve ever really been there, or if the press has always been comfortably manipulated by those with power. But yeah, I assume genuine experts are part of the solution.
      - contravariant 6y ago
        Off topic, but 'exponential decrease' is my favourite misuse, simply because exponential decrease is slower than a linear (steady) decrease.
  - contravariant 6y ago
    Even if achievable it seem inhumane. And besides it seems far more achievable to just have trustworthy journalists, even though that's already difficult in itself.
amelius 6y ago
Antibiotics resistance is also a cat and mouse game. It's still useful to keep playing the game though.
- sildur 6y ago
  The difference is that all the bacteria can become resistant to the antibiotic soon after it is created.
  - dijksterhuis 6y ago
    As can deepfakes. All it takes is an additional step to optimise wrt the model that tries to catch it.
    - sildur 6y ago
      Yeah, I was dismissing the analogy with antibiotics because usually it takes quite some time between creating the antibiotic and germs being resistant. But with deepfakes the arms race is almost instantaneous. The moment something appears to tell apart deepfakes, the moment people can train deepfakes against that something.
      - amelius 6y ago
        Perhaps the deepfake checking should be a third-party service? So you can only check so many deepfakes per day, limiting these attacks (i.e., you can't realistically put the checking inside a training loop). Just an idea ...
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
nottorp 6y ago
Ref: http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/29579 http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/29579 Robert Sheckley's Watchbird

IgorPartola 6y ago

I feel like it’s time to bring in Heinlein’s Fair Witness concept: https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Fair%20Witness https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Fair%20Witne... If you think about it, when we had relatively few journalists and their reputation was on the line with every story they wrote they in a way were fair witnesses. Since we have moved to a hybrid model of professional journalists and a huge caste of YouTubers, podcasters, bloggers, and twitters, it has become impossible to hold everyone to a high journalistic standard. At the same time Fox News has brought on an era of politicized news so the bias is now inherent. Maybe if we had a few hundred fair witnesses that offered a professional service we could have a way to verify facts. Then again, it’s one thing to have a fair witness present facts, it’s another to have that witness’s likeness be deep faked and broadcast all over the web saying something they didn’t actually say. Another solution may be regulatory: anyone broadcasting a deep fake with a huge disclaimer that it is a fake gets a 20% of their net worth fine. Draconian but I can see it working.

ben_w 6y ago
We need something, but Fair Witnesses seem both exploitable and unachievable given the way human memories work.
- dvtrn 6y ago
  “Expert witnesses” then?
  - ben_w 6y ago
    “Expert” is a misused term, much like “exponential”. I see the value of the press as being as much of an intelligence agency as the combined CIA, NSA, and FBI, but serving the electorate and investigating all those with power — politicians, police, military, religious, business, and so on — so that the electorate can make informed decisions. I don’t know how to get there from here. Heck, I don’t even know if we’ve ever really been there, or if the press has always been comfortably manipulated by those with power. But yeah, I assume genuine experts are part of the solution.
    - contravariant 6y ago
      Off topic, but 'exponential decrease' is my favourite misuse, simply because exponential decrease is slower than a linear (steady) decrease.
- contravariant 6y ago
  Even if achievable it seem inhumane. And besides it seems far more achievable to just have trustworthy journalists, even though that's already difficult in itself.

amelius 6y ago

Antibiotics resistance is also a cat and mouse game. It's still useful to keep playing the game though.

sildur 6y ago
The difference is that all the bacteria can become resistant to the antibiotic soon after it is created.
- dijksterhuis 6y ago
  As can deepfakes. All it takes is an additional step to optimise wrt the model that tries to catch it.
  - sildur 6y ago
    Yeah, I was dismissing the analogy with antibiotics because usually it takes quite some time between creating the antibiotic and germs being resistant. But with deepfakes the arms race is almost instantaneous. The moment something appears to tell apart deepfakes, the moment people can train deepfakes against that something.
    - amelius 6y ago
      Perhaps the deepfake checking should be a third-party service? So you can only check so many deepfakes per day, limiting these attacks (i.e., you can't realistically put the checking inside a training loop). Just an idea ...

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

nottorp 6y ago

Ref: http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/29579 http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/29579 Robert Sheckley's Watchbird