3 ms·
> I expect that any video submitted as court evidence will undergo the necessary scrutiny. Evidence often only undergoes the level of scrutiny for which the ac
by handedness 6y ago
> I expect that any video submitted as court evidence will undergo the necessary scrutiny.
Evidence often only undergoes the level of scrutiny for which the accused are willing and able to pay. Contesting a sophisticated deep fake would require leading expert witness research and testimony, which can cost thousands of dollars per hour and take weeks or months.
For the proverbial Trial of the Century, fake detection may well be robust enough for a long time to come. For many others, though, it's likely another shift in the balance of power further in favor of the well-funded, whether said funding comes by way of existing wealth or an ability to print currency.
- behringer 6y agoScrutiny only happens when evidence is contested as forged. You have to be willing to lie under oath that the evidence is forged before anyone would even care to look into it. And if it's determined not a fake through other evidence, for example, corroborating witnesses and footage, then you'll have impeached yourself and nobody will really believe you from then on. Eg, evidence is kind of like a witness. If all the evidence is stacked against you, you're screwed. If one video shows you and you claim it's fake and everything else points to it being fake, there's a shadow of a doubt. I wouldn't worry too much about forged evidence.
- handedness 6y agoCorrect, I'm familiar with how it works, hence whether they are willing and able to contest it. Often the will to contest it just isn't there, as people know they've been had. That said, one's will is often contingent on one's ability. Anyway, the reality is likely that the biggest impact of forged evidence is unlikely to be in courtrooms; it's going to be in the court of public opinion.