8 ms·
Deepfake scams are here and we're not ready
- orblivion 4y agoI want to be caught off guard by one of these to know if I'd actually fall for it. Knowing what it is upfront, Joe Rogan sounds a little like a robot to me in this video.
- fsckboy 4y agoconvincing me that Joe Rogan said something is going to fool me how?
- Gigachad 4y agoAfter seeing the deep fakes of NileRed on YouTube, I constantly feel like the real videos are fake and too robotic too.
- readthenotes1 4y agoI nearly fell for the Queen saying "There are few things more hurtful than someone telling you they prefer the company of Canadians." And that was just a few years ago... The best lies, and the best cons, always use the truth as a weapon
- rcme 4y agoNo… we’re ready. Celebrity endorsements have always been meaningless. Hopefully more people realize this.
- minimaxir 4y agoThey may be useless to you, but you are most likely not the target market for these ads. Celebrity/influencer marketing is one of the few marketing strategies that actually works consistently.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- UncleEntity 4y agoProbably used to work consistently is more apt. What’s the world coming to if you can’t trust that the person pushing a product isn’t actually a paid corporate shill but is instead a scammer trying to separate you from your money. There’s probably a distinction between the two, right? Paris Hilton promoting CryptoKitties vs a fake Paris Hilton promoting CryptoKitties — the difference is obvious.
- minimaxir 4y agoThat's the reason why people who make high-effort deepfakes tend to attract a lot of lawsuits, which serves as a strong check on widespread usage.
- flangola7 4y agoI'm not aware of any deepfake lawsuits at all. You can't sue an anonymous 4chan user or some Russian with a GitHub project
- minimaxir 4y agoIn the case of the original submission, I suspect Joe Rogan's lawyers can sue the energy company explicitly named, and subpoena TikTok for more detailed business identification and ad engagement for quantifying damages.
- rcme 4y agoThe costs of doing that will become exorbitant if the problem becomes widespread.
- coffeebeqn 4y agoEven Coffeezilla selling a fake security or privacy tool for example
- sandworm101 4y agoKardashian? No. Will not impact my buying habits whatsoever. But if LTT says to stay away from a product, I would be very very hesitant to consider it. If Attenborough does a psa, I will 100% take his opinion into consideration. Not everything is about "influencers".
- rib3ye 4y agoIs this an argument against LTT being an influencer?
- LilBytes 4y agoI read it as an argument for LTT being an influence. Sorry, broke my own standards. LTT = Linus Tech Tips. YouTuber. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXuqSBlHAE6Xw-yeJA0Tunw https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCXuqSBlHAE6Xw-yeJA0Tunw
- refuse 4y agoWHO IS LTT
- nl 4y agoI think it is Linus Tech Tips. Unclear if the OP would prefer makeup recommendations from Linus over Kim Kardasian or if they just don't buy makeup.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- acomjean 4y agoLinus tech tips is a YouTube channel by some guy in Canada who reviews computers and other tech. It’s turned into a kind of mini channel with other reviewers. Not to be confused with “Linus” of Linux fame who doesn’t contribute to the channel.
- sandworm101 4y ago
- jay_kyburz 4y agoJust wait till somebody deepfakes Sundar Pichai saying something dumb, tanking Googles share price for a few minutes, but long enough for that somebody to get rich. I think it might be refreshing for everybody to completely disbelieve everything they see and hear on screens. Where we can only believe what we can hold in our hands in front of us. It's going to be hard to run a democracy though.
- minimaxir 4y agoDeepfake technology has been in a good enough state for years that a bad actor could do just that. There are many reasons they haven't. (How would you distribute a deepfake of Pichai such that the markets would take it seriously?) Even during the crypto boom there were deepfakes to manipulate the market, which didn't even work.
- haswell 4y agoHuberman isn’t a celebrity though, and is known for giving out advice that is usually at least somewhat credible.
- bruce511 4y agoEndorsements are not the problem. They are clearly promoting a product, and we all presume they've been paid to do do. The real problem are the not-endorsements. The "our cameras caught this when he thought his mic was off". For politics especially its the unscripted moments people believe. Equally it offers plausible deniability to anything that is captured. Just claim its a deep-fake and the vast majority of supporters will believe you,because they want to. Phrases like "a picture never lies" or "I'll believe it when I see it" all start falling away. In a world where people want to be right, not informed; when anger wins more elections than hope, where fear of the future overwhelms the comfort of the present, deep fakes erode one more thing you can trust.
- thatguy0900 4y agoExactly. I'm not worried at all about fakes. I'm worried about people claiming fakes. If ChatGPT can perfectly imitate anyone's speech patterns, and you can fake someone's voice and video perfectly, everyone with power in the world basically gets out of everything. Evidence will be meaningless.
- raydiatian 4y ago[flagged]
- drippingfist69 4y agoCan you elaborate on why you think Coffeezilla is a media unworthy cry baby?
- raydiatian 4y ago[flagged]
- operatingthetan 4y agoIt's a pretty unnuanced criticism to complain that critics are just whiners. At the very least you could explain something he was wrong about instead of pointing at tone. Obviously he's not a 'gullible mark' if he's actively seeking scammers to highlight on his channel, how is that confusing for you?
- hjkl0 4y agoNot OC, but FWIW, making yourself the story and promoting it with incessant clickbait are two a pretty big red flags
- RcouF1uZ4gsC 4y agoInteresting that this was posted on the date of the Super Bowl. At last year’s Super Bowl there were real celebrity endorsements of a real scam, FTX. Honestly, the big scams are going to spend real money and get the real endorsements. I don’t know how much difference in real life deepfakes will make.
- red-iron-pine 4y agoFTX had superbowl tier money to spend, and was aiming at the whole country. these deepfakes will be done on the cheap, and aimed at those likely to buy the BS -- i.e. your mom. Don't mean that as in insult ("yo mama..."), but like literally, these are the scams that will target elderly, non-technical women, kids, etc.
- xwdv 4y agoDeepfake scams to sell products is the least creative way to use deepfakes. The real value is in creating deepfakes of politicians that can influence elections.
- red-iron-pine 4y agoWe've already seen how easy it is to get fake politicians made of flesh. Santos and Luna being the most recent, but no shortage of 'em beforehand. Why add tech to the mix when you can just promote idiots and liars?
- impalallama 4y agoI’m at the point where I genuinely would like to see this ai stuff heavily regulated to outright banned. Any upside where Disney gets to not pay actors and instead just synthesize Princess Leia or Darth Vader for Star Wars XXIV is vastly outweighed by the sheer amount of fraud that can be committed when we have hyper realistic ai voices calling in our family members voices asking for crypto deposits. Anyone who disagrees join my start up where we generate the voice of dead family members so we can get people to pay indulgences to escape hell.
- greesil 4y agoWhen AI is outlawed then only outlaws will have GPUs or something
- tarr11 4y agoBanning or regulating AI wouldn’t impact scammers at all.
- throw10920 4y agoOr hostile nation-states, for that matter.
- janalsncm 4y agoI think it would. There’s a degree of expertise required to create a good deepfake. Banning it will reduce the pool of professional deepfake artists which 1) drives up the price of deepfakes and 2) makes it harder to secure good ones. And since the effectiveness of a deepfake scam depends on the quality of the deepfake, fewer people will be scammed.
- dattmavis 4y agoDrugs are expensive for the same reasons. Most of the people who want to do them still do, just at a higher price. Regulation is fine, but prohibition rarely works.
- jszymborski 4y ago
- idontwantthis 4y agoI wonder if this will kill “influencer” as a career. If I can pick between deepfake Kim Kardashian and a real tik tok star I have to pay more and actually talk to, I think I’d pick fake KK. She should start authorizing deepfakes and take in cash while literally doing nothing.
- duxup 4y agoPeople still listen to the real personalities via their official outlets.
- hackernewds 4y agoKK is an influencer as well? What is your point
- idontwantthis 4y agoI mean that maybe there will be no more market for anyone not already established.
- duxup 4y agoI feel like fake celebrity endorsements for scam products are the least of our concerns.
- johnsillings 4y agoFor anyone who hasn't seen his videos, Coffeezilla's (the guy who tweeted this) Youtube channel is fantastic: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCFQMnBA3CS502aghlcr0_aw https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCFQMnBA3CS502aghlcr0_aw
- Javantea_ 4y agoIn what way are we not ready? If you don't have the necessary critical reasoning skills to doubt Joe Rogan telling you about complete bullshit, no one needs technology to trick you into a scam. If you have critical reasoning skills, it's pretty hard to convince you to part with your money. Who exactly does this scam target?
- jhanschoo 4y agoSay you have a child or close niece or nephew with insufficient latent opsec and a lot of public social posts from which an attacker can mine their voice and compromise their account, and they call you asking for urgent help...
- LightHugger 4y agoThis has been happening to a few relatives for about a year now. The niece calling for help from "jail" using an impersonated voice, it's quite impressive. The niece being impersonated has some shows, fairly small but enough to impersonate!
- nobrains 4y agoThe video was created to highlight an extreme, where it should be very obvious that it was faked. However, an actual attack will be subtle.
- deafpolygon 4y agoOh I'm ready. I assume everything on the 'net is a possible scam.
- corbulo 4y agoWe've actually been approaching being ready for a few years now. Now more than ever people have begun to add a layer of skepticism and treat information as separate from reality itself. Remember 10-15 years ago? If it was on the news, thats because it happened. If an important politician said it that's because it's important. If the 'expert' said it then it must be true! If you need a refresher go visit old political threads on reddit from 10+ years ago. You'll recognize your old sheltered political views, and yes it was somehow even more naive and coddled than reddit of today. Deepfakes will be a net good. It will make more ideas have to stand on their own merits (because there will be limited authority to validate the medium thats conveying it, mitigates reliance on fallacies) if you can make <famous politician> say <total opposite of their entire platform>. It will put a damper on how seriously people take everything on the internet outside of official sources (thank god). It will effectively weaponize social media's ills against itself, the more its abused the greater that effect. People are finally starting to ask the questions they should be asking on a large scale, "where is chatGPT taking us, do we want more of this?", those kinds of meta-questions were never being asked even a few years ago. Almost no one asked that about smartphones when they came out. Better late than never.
- vlunkr 4y ago> Now more than ever people have begun to add a layer of skepticism and treat information as separate from reality itself. This is pretty strong blanket statement. A disturbing amount of people have bought into conspiracies like Qanon in the last few years.
- corbulo 4y agoThose are a symptom of burgeoning skepticism. Just because people are acquiring newfound skepticism doesn't mean they'll believe all of the optimal and reasonable things. It goes back to normal where much like for all of previous human history, people believed ridiculous rumors all the time. It was only the last 100-150 years or so that people have really gotten locked in to the single minded ideology wars while totally locking down their sources of information.
- xboxnolifes 4y ago
- aaron695 4y ago[dead]
- smitty1e 4y agoThere are always the traditional vistas of retail scams.
- Zetobal 4y agoI don't know grandpa's "If it sounds too good to be true it's probably not true." Still works quite well.