6 ms·

Would you like to explain why for those of us out of the loop?

LegitShady 6y ago
https://contentauthenticity.org/our-members https://contentauthenticity.org/our-members Basically a large group of companies are forming a group to create an agreed upon fingerprinting system for 'content' (read: everything) to destroy privacy in the name of 'fighting disinformation'.
- smt88 6y ago
  Isn't such a thing necessary as we see US presidents falling for (deep)fake media? Is there a privacy-respecting solution that you prefer?
  - texasbigdata 6y ago
    Well, privacy is a fundamental human right. Perhaps not doing anything is better than Adobes likely self serving solution.
    - smt88 6y ago
      That's why I asked about a privacy-respecting solution. I understand that an Adobe product is not that.
  - rubyist5eva 6y ago
    I'm just going to say, if you don't think this _isn't_ going to be massively abused - take a look at what the CCP, or any authoritarian regime does really, to silence dissent. Don't have a good enough social credit because you shared an opinion somebody doesn't like one too many times? Intel and Microsoft will just remotely brick all your devices. > Is there a privacy-respecting solution that you prefer? Yeah, it's called being media literate, using my brain and being vigilant. I don't need Pat Gelsinger, Satya Nadella, Sundar Pichai, Shantanu Narayen, Tim Cook, Mark Zuckerberg, Jack Dorsey or any other power hungry jackass telling me what to think.
    - dralley 6y ago
      This is a no-win situation, really. All of those arguments can be made about deepfakes too.
    - smt88 6y ago
      What if a journalist makes a video and wants everyone to know where it came from? If it's all opt-in (and otherwise anonymous), doesn't that solve the privacy issue? I'm definitely not advocating for the OP solution, which is why I asked if anyone knew of alternatives.
      - malikNF 6y ago
        Wont just post it from an official social media account belonging to that journalist fix this issue ? It starts off with opt in, then they do an update to now opt out, then then do an update to make it harder to opt-out and next thing we know this is something everyone has to live with.
      - kortex 6y ago
        How do we know evidence is valid in a court case? Chain of custody and documentation. Add to that some commitment scheme and trusted time-stamping and publish in real time and you are most of the way there to extremely veridical publishing. But the main problem is the people most vulnerable to fake media are already bamboozled by bad Photoshop jobs. I don't see how any signing scheme will help.
      - rubyist5eva 6y ago
        The Journalism Industry has solved the "trust" problem decades ago. This isn't the problem the CCPA is trying to solve.
    - lrem 6y ago
      So, how do you make uncle Bob media literate?
      - rowanG077 6y ago
        Schooling, campaigns. A mandatory "driving" license for media consumption.
  - LegitShady 6y ago
    No, this thing is not necessary. That's an excuse for giving up privacy to a group of unaccountable corporations who exist to make money and are often abusive of their positions. I don't have an answer per se, but if your answer is some sort of content blockchain so everything is traceable, then it doesn't matter that I don't have the answer. That's so repulsive as to not require an alternate solution. It's like giving yourself a lobotomy because you have a headache. It's the wrong answer full stop.
  - lucb1e 6y ago
    Not sure why this is downvoted, the questions are constructive for the thread. To add a question: why is it bad if it's an optional component? Nobody's forcing you to disclose that you shot a certain picture, unless I'm misunderstanding the concept here.
    - rubyist5eva 6y ago
      The endgame is to be able to have your fingerprint in every device you own, and it is not going to be optional. So that no matter if you uploaded a photo from your phone, an ipad, your PC - they will know it was you. It's going to be embedded at every level of the stack, from a file - right down to the silicon (if Intel's involvement is any indication). They want to know every piece of content you create and distribute, not so that they can trace it back to you - but also so that they can ultimate shut you down if you don't live up to their standard of "good citizen".
      - userbinator 6y ago
        I can see in the future the prices for "pre-spyware" hardware going up, much like "pre-emissions" is a thing in the car enthusiast community and lately, interestingly enough, farmers (right to repair and all that). Computers are plenty fast already, without the bloat of "modern" software forcing you to upgrade... if we're going to go down that conspiracy rabbithole further, those hostile behaviours all align against the users.
      - sgift 6y ago
        Do you have any proof or even hint for your suggestions or is this just a doom 'n gloom mixed with "they are out to get you" paranoid trope of the week?
        rubyist5eva 6y ago
        Do you think the mass deplatforming of "wrong thinkers" - which we have been seeing a shocking amount lately - is going to be harder, the same, or less difficult with something like the CCPA tracking literally everything you are doing?
  - yowlingcat 6y ago
    > Isn't such a thing necessary as we see US presidents falling for (deep)fake media? They also fall for non-deepfaked media as well, and spearphishing, and so on. The greatest threat vector has always been the wetware.
  - kortex 6y ago
    Deep fake propaganda is not really a problem. I've spent the past two years working in the media forensics space. Deep fakes ended up being much less of a threat than anticipated. Anti deep fake models are quite proficient now too. The big problem now is semantic forensics - taking media out of context and spinning a new narrative. https://www.theverge.com/2019/3/5/18251736/deepfake-propaganda-misinformation-troll-video-hoax https://www.theverge.com/2019/3/5/18251736/deepfake-propagan...

https://contentauthenticity.org/our-members https://contentauthenticity.org/our-members Basically a large group of companies are forming a group to create an agreed upon fingerprinting system for 'content' (read: everything) to destroy privacy in the name of 'fighting disinformation'.

smt88 6y ago
Isn't such a thing necessary as we see US presidents falling for (deep)fake media? Is there a privacy-respecting solution that you prefer?
- texasbigdata 6y ago
  Well, privacy is a fundamental human right. Perhaps not doing anything is better than Adobes likely self serving solution.
  - smt88 6y ago
    That's why I asked about a privacy-respecting solution. I understand that an Adobe product is not that.
- rubyist5eva 6y ago
  I'm just going to say, if you don't think this _isn't_ going to be massively abused - take a look at what the CCP, or any authoritarian regime does really, to silence dissent. Don't have a good enough social credit because you shared an opinion somebody doesn't like one too many times? Intel and Microsoft will just remotely brick all your devices. > Is there a privacy-respecting solution that you prefer? Yeah, it's called being media literate, using my brain and being vigilant. I don't need Pat Gelsinger, Satya Nadella, Sundar Pichai, Shantanu Narayen, Tim Cook, Mark Zuckerberg, Jack Dorsey or any other power hungry jackass telling me what to think.
  - dralley 6y ago
    This is a no-win situation, really. All of those arguments can be made about deepfakes too.
  - smt88 6y ago
    What if a journalist makes a video and wants everyone to know where it came from? If it's all opt-in (and otherwise anonymous), doesn't that solve the privacy issue? I'm definitely not advocating for the OP solution, which is why I asked if anyone knew of alternatives.
    - malikNF 6y ago
      Wont just post it from an official social media account belonging to that journalist fix this issue ? It starts off with opt in, then they do an update to now opt out, then then do an update to make it harder to opt-out and next thing we know this is something everyone has to live with.
    - kortex 6y ago
      How do we know evidence is valid in a court case? Chain of custody and documentation. Add to that some commitment scheme and trusted time-stamping and publish in real time and you are most of the way there to extremely veridical publishing. But the main problem is the people most vulnerable to fake media are already bamboozled by bad Photoshop jobs. I don't see how any signing scheme will help.
    - rubyist5eva 6y ago
      The Journalism Industry has solved the "trust" problem decades ago. This isn't the problem the CCPA is trying to solve.
  - lrem 6y ago
    So, how do you make uncle Bob media literate?
    - rowanG077 6y ago
      Schooling, campaigns. A mandatory "driving" license for media consumption.
- LegitShady 6y ago
  No, this thing is not necessary. That's an excuse for giving up privacy to a group of unaccountable corporations who exist to make money and are often abusive of their positions. I don't have an answer per se, but if your answer is some sort of content blockchain so everything is traceable, then it doesn't matter that I don't have the answer. That's so repulsive as to not require an alternate solution. It's like giving yourself a lobotomy because you have a headache. It's the wrong answer full stop.
- lucb1e 6y ago
  Not sure why this is downvoted, the questions are constructive for the thread. To add a question: why is it bad if it's an optional component? Nobody's forcing you to disclose that you shot a certain picture, unless I'm misunderstanding the concept here.
  - rubyist5eva 6y ago
    The endgame is to be able to have your fingerprint in every device you own, and it is not going to be optional. So that no matter if you uploaded a photo from your phone, an ipad, your PC - they will know it was you. It's going to be embedded at every level of the stack, from a file - right down to the silicon (if Intel's involvement is any indication). They want to know every piece of content you create and distribute, not so that they can trace it back to you - but also so that they can ultimate shut you down if you don't live up to their standard of "good citizen".
    - userbinator 6y ago
      I can see in the future the prices for "pre-spyware" hardware going up, much like "pre-emissions" is a thing in the car enthusiast community and lately, interestingly enough, farmers (right to repair and all that). Computers are plenty fast already, without the bloat of "modern" software forcing you to upgrade... if we're going to go down that conspiracy rabbithole further, those hostile behaviours all align against the users.
    - sgift 6y ago
      Do you have any proof or even hint for your suggestions or is this just a doom 'n gloom mixed with "they are out to get you" paranoid trope of the week?
      - rubyist5eva 6y ago
        Do you think the mass deplatforming of "wrong thinkers" - which we have been seeing a shocking amount lately - is going to be harder, the same, or less difficult with something like the CCPA tracking literally everything you are doing?
- yowlingcat 6y ago
  > Isn't such a thing necessary as we see US presidents falling for (deep)fake media? They also fall for non-deepfaked media as well, and spearphishing, and so on. The greatest threat vector has always been the wetware.
- kortex 6y ago
  Deep fake propaganda is not really a problem. I've spent the past two years working in the media forensics space. Deep fakes ended up being much less of a threat than anticipated. Anti deep fake models are quite proficient now too. The big problem now is semantic forensics - taking media out of context and spinning a new narrative. https://www.theverge.com/2019/3/5/18251736/deepfake-propaganda-misinformation-troll-video-hoax https://www.theverge.com/2019/3/5/18251736/deepfake-propagan...