3 ms·

Being able to create fake films doesn't really buy you anything, when people aren't believing them. And for believability, you need connections with reality and

Being able to create fake films doesn't really buy you anything, when people aren't believing them. And for believability, you need connections with reality and trust, that you don't get from fake films alone. People can just look at other sources and see that none of this happened at the given time and place. And random videos that pop up on the Internet are very low in terms of trust anyway. If you want to influence public opinion, there are already far more powerful tools. Just be Google or Twitter and create some strategically placed filter bubbles. Everything people will see, actually happened and can be verified. Nothing is hidden and will show up with a specific enough search query. But every less specific search query will nudge people into whatever direction you want them to move.

code51 5y ago
To counter that, imagine police bodycams with embedded AI touching up live-recording so that the police was always right, suspect always did something wrong. If you build the source device with this touch-up capability, if you are the certificate authority about these, if you are also defining how these recordings would be used in court, then a perfect fake is useful. (None of us see the actual sensor output from our mobile phones) TL;DR In order for a fake to be useful, you have to fake AND be the only reputable source. If other recorders cannot get close enough, then your touched-up "real" video is the only material available.