4 ms·

So just to summarize: 1. A cheerleader's mom anonymously texted some images and a video of a rival cheerleader to her coach. One of these images was a deepfake

So just to summarize: 1. A cheerleader's mom anonymously texted some images and a video of a rival cheerleader to her coach. One of these images was a deepfake—a swimsuit photo off of Facebook edited to make the subject look nude. The other images and the video (of the girls drinking and smoking), were real. 2. The girl and her mom were charged with cyber harassment and harassment. The prosecutors weren't entirely clear on which of the photos + video were real and which were edited—the victim claimed they were all fake—but the whole thing was generally classed as harassment. Later, the police claimed that "metadata analysis" proved the video was fake. 3. ABC (among others, but ABC is mentioned in this article) ran a TV spot about this story, repeating the prosecutor's assertion that the video was manipulated 4. Twitter user @HenryAjder ("Deepfake expert"), among others, pointed out the error 5. The DailyDot published this article This seems like a bit of a nothingburger? Any reason we're still talking about this? Nobody was "discrediting evidence", the videos & photos were only evidence to one thing—that someone sent them to her coach in order to get her kicked off the team. Whether they were real or not was immaterial to the harassment that occurred.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
swiley 6y ago
Wow I was expecting assholes from 4chan not an obsessive soccer mom.
- throwaway0a5e 6y ago
  Technology trickles down Nations state > Bigco > Smallco > Neckbeards > Karen (skipping some steps but you catch the drift). The metadata stuff the NSA was doing 20yr ago is what advertisers are doing today. SpaceX is doing stuff that was recently only the purview of nation states.
  - lupire 6y ago
    The use of weird slurs obscures the point you are making.
jjk166 6y ago
> The statement is similar to claims made by Engelhart to the Daily Dot that Spone allegedly used legitimate video as a basis for the deepfake. Police did not know whether the alleged victim’s face was added to a video of another young female vaping or if a vaping pen and smoke was digitally added to a legitimate video of the alleged victim. > Weintraub also stated during the press conference that investigators determined that the vaping video had been manipulated after analyzing its “metadata,” a term which refers to embedded information in digital media that can reveal how and when it was last edited. > But after contacting Reiss, the officer who investigated Spone, the Daily Dot learned that police never actually obtained the original vaping video. Instead, like what was seen on NBC News, police only had access to a cellphone recording taken by Spone of the vaping video being played on a separate device. Any metadata analysis would therefore fail to include information on the source video. It appears the police are calling the video of the vaping a deepfake
- nightpool 6y ago
  My mistake! I had hedged around that point in my original comment, but I removed it after reading the twitter thread DailyDot where HenryAjder seemed to imply the opposite. I've updated my comment to clarify
danso 6y ago
I think it's interesting if law enforcement bungles a type of evidence that is almost certainly going to be more of a society-wide problem in the near future
- nightpool 6y ago
  My impression is that law enforcement generally bungles every single type of evidence on a regular basis. Computer evidence is only notable because we're paying more attention to it.
  - zionic 6y ago
    Alternate: they bungle computer evidence just as much but society hasn’t caught up to their ineptitude yet.
DyslexicAtheist 6y ago
> This seems like a bit of a nothingburger? what was a takeaway here regardless of the story being wrong, is that the damage deepfakes will cause might not be what self-proclaimed futurists predicted (e.g. rampant use of the technology as a means to subvert evidence) but the opposite: that people will counter justified allegations of evidence as being deepfakes. So not the technology is doing most of the damage but the hypothetical possibility that allows that these arguments now exist. Imagine any Karen or Kyle now being presented with video evidence will soon scream "deepfake". And few have seen this coming because we were more absorbed with hypothetical (but less realistic) scenarios. This is even more fascinating (and was the simpler answer yet most have missed it). https://cla.purdue.edu/academic/english/theory/postmodernism/modules/baudrillardsimulation.html https://cla.purdue.edu/academic/english/theory/postmodernism...
- lupire 6y ago
  > rampant use of the technology as a means to subvert evidence) but the opposite: that people will counter justified allegations of evidence as being deepfakes. That's not the opposite, that is subverting evidence. Also, please stop using ordinary names as slurs.
- ramblerman 6y ago
  Thats Good no? Maybe we can get back to actually discussing content and topics again. Currently we have reached peak character assasination. And you can ruin a life at this point because of one moment caught on tape. Who cares if Karen or Kyle did x,y,z. Specially if it was intended to be private.
macawfish 6y ago
The facts of the situation are definitely not that exciting but the significance of the story itself is pretty monumental. Just the fact that such ordinary people are caught up in public uncertainty about the authenticity of media depicting very ordinary human stuff, all because of the ubiquity of a bunch of < 10 year old tech... this is the tip of a massive very messy iceberg.
- zionic 6y ago
  We’re not that far off from every 14 year old being able to do this on their phone. The rising millennial generation is not ready for the chaos their progeny is about to unleash on the world.
  - Tdiddy21 6y ago
    Agreed. If I had the power to make deep fakes as a child I might have landed at least 3 people in prison, and had charges put on multiple people I just didn't like.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

swiley 6y ago

Wow I was expecting assholes from 4chan not an obsessive soccer mom.

throwaway0a5e 6y ago
Technology trickles down Nations state > Bigco > Smallco > Neckbeards > Karen (skipping some steps but you catch the drift). The metadata stuff the NSA was doing 20yr ago is what advertisers are doing today. SpaceX is doing stuff that was recently only the purview of nation states.
- lupire 6y ago
  The use of weird slurs obscures the point you are making.

jjk166 6y ago

> The statement is similar to claims made by Engelhart to the Daily Dot that Spone allegedly used legitimate video as a basis for the deepfake. Police did not know whether the alleged victim’s face was added to a video of another young female vaping or if a vaping pen and smoke was digitally added to a legitimate video of the alleged victim. > Weintraub also stated during the press conference that investigators determined that the vaping video had been manipulated after analyzing its “metadata,” a term which refers to embedded information in digital media that can reveal how and when it was last edited. > But after contacting Reiss, the officer who investigated Spone, the Daily Dot learned that police never actually obtained the original vaping video. Instead, like what was seen on NBC News, police only had access to a cellphone recording taken by Spone of the vaping video being played on a separate device. Any metadata analysis would therefore fail to include information on the source video. It appears the police are calling the video of the vaping a deepfake

nightpool 6y ago
My mistake! I had hedged around that point in my original comment, but I removed it after reading the twitter thread DailyDot where HenryAjder seemed to imply the opposite. I've updated my comment to clarify

danso 6y ago

I think it's interesting if law enforcement bungles a type of evidence that is almost certainly going to be more of a society-wide problem in the near future

nightpool 6y ago
My impression is that law enforcement generally bungles every single type of evidence on a regular basis. Computer evidence is only notable because we're paying more attention to it.
- zionic 6y ago
  Alternate: they bungle computer evidence just as much but society hasn’t caught up to their ineptitude yet.

DyslexicAtheist 6y ago

> This seems like a bit of a nothingburger? what was a takeaway here regardless of the story being wrong, is that the damage deepfakes will cause might not be what self-proclaimed futurists predicted (e.g. rampant use of the technology as a means to subvert evidence) but the opposite: that people will counter justified allegations of evidence as being deepfakes. So not the technology is doing most of the damage but the hypothetical possibility that allows that these arguments now exist. Imagine any Karen or Kyle now being presented with video evidence will soon scream "deepfake". And few have seen this coming because we were more absorbed with hypothetical (but less realistic) scenarios. This is even more fascinating (and was the simpler answer yet most have missed it). https://cla.purdue.edu/academic/english/theory/postmodernism/modules/baudrillardsimulation.html https://cla.purdue.edu/academic/english/theory/postmodernism...

lupire 6y ago
> rampant use of the technology as a means to subvert evidence) but the opposite: that people will counter justified allegations of evidence as being deepfakes. That's not the opposite, that is subverting evidence. Also, please stop using ordinary names as slurs.
ramblerman 6y ago
Thats Good no? Maybe we can get back to actually discussing content and topics again. Currently we have reached peak character assasination. And you can ruin a life at this point because of one moment caught on tape. Who cares if Karen or Kyle did x,y,z. Specially if it was intended to be private.

macawfish 6y ago

The facts of the situation are definitely not that exciting but the significance of the story itself is pretty monumental. Just the fact that such ordinary people are caught up in public uncertainty about the authenticity of media depicting very ordinary human stuff, all because of the ubiquity of a bunch of < 10 year old tech... this is the tip of a massive very messy iceberg.

zionic 6y ago
We’re not that far off from every 14 year old being able to do this on their phone. The rising millennial generation is not ready for the chaos their progeny is about to unleash on the world.
- Tdiddy21 6y ago
  Agreed. If I had the power to make deep fakes as a child I might have landed at least 3 people in prison, and had charges put on multiple people I just didn't like.