5 ms·

No it is not. People used to be able to trust what they saw with their own two eyes. Hollywood could come up with some fake magic, but your average joe couldn’t

by rcarr 4y ago

No it is not. People used to be able to trust what they saw with their own two eyes. Hollywood could come up with some fake magic, but your average joe couldn’t. Have a look at the new unreal engine demo. Pretty soon, anyone will be able to take a person’s social media photos and videos and place them into any scene they want. Did you see the news article of the pope in a white coat? Heads up, it was an AI photo and it tricked millions. What do you think might happen if someone decides to flood the internet with a thousand fake George Floyd videos to incite riots because “the ends justify the means”. This is the world we are entering.

tomjakubowski 4y ago
photoshopped images have been deceiving people for decades. it's just getting easier to scale production and harder to identify manipulated images
SAI_Peregrinus 4y ago
You can still trust what you can see with your own two eyes. You can't trust videos or photos of things. Computer image/video editors (e.g. Photoshop, AfterEffects) have made photos & videos untrustworthy for years if a skilled editor made the modifications, and before that some darkroom tricks could do a reasonable job. The new AIs make it cheaper & easier to fake photos and videos.
- rcarr 4y ago
  Good point. You can’t trust anything you see on a screen anymore. Although even your eyes can deceive you in the real world occasionally.
  - SAI_Peregrinus 4y ago
    Yes, optical illusions do exist. They're not particularly useful for the sorts of deceptions that edited media can produce though, so they're not much of a threat.
    - rcarr 4y ago
      I wasn’t really talking optical illusions but more something along the lines of the film vantage point or just detective work in general. A lot of people can recall the same event and be telling it faithfully to what they saw and remember but the actual truth of what happened can be something entirely different to their own individual perception. I suppose something like saying you saw someone murder someone with a gun and then run off, when if you’d have seen it from another angle then you would have seen the guy was acting in self defence because he was about to get stabbed or something like that
jmull 4y ago
> What do you think might happen if someone decides to flood the internet with a thousand fake George Floyd videos to incite riots because “the ends justify the means”. People have been flooding the internet with lies all along -- and, indeed, sometimes incite riots with those lies. I get it: there are new ways to lie now, and some will be more susceptible because they don't pay attention to the moving target of what's possible with deepfake technology. But adding one more way to lie to the existing pile of a thousand ways doesn't change the balance, especially since the effectiveness of a lie doesn't depend on its believability, but on whether it tells a story the listener wants to believe.

by rcarr 4y ago

tomjakubowski 4y ago

photoshopped images have been deceiving people for decades. it's just getting easier to scale production and harder to identify manipulated images

SAI_Peregrinus 4y ago

You can still trust what you can see with your own two eyes. You can't trust videos or photos of things. Computer image/video editors (e.g. Photoshop, AfterEffects) have made photos & videos untrustworthy for years if a skilled editor made the modifications, and before that some darkroom tricks could do a reasonable job. The new AIs make it cheaper & easier to fake photos and videos.

rcarr 4y ago
Good point. You can’t trust anything you see on a screen anymore. Although even your eyes can deceive you in the real world occasionally.
- SAI_Peregrinus 4y ago
  Yes, optical illusions do exist. They're not particularly useful for the sorts of deceptions that edited media can produce though, so they're not much of a threat.
  - rcarr 4y ago
    I wasn’t really talking optical illusions but more something along the lines of the film vantage point or just detective work in general. A lot of people can recall the same event and be telling it faithfully to what they saw and remember but the actual truth of what happened can be something entirely different to their own individual perception. I suppose something like saying you saw someone murder someone with a gun and then run off, when if you’d have seen it from another angle then you would have seen the guy was acting in self defence because he was about to get stabbed or something like that

jmull 4y ago

> What do you think might happen if someone decides to flood the internet with a thousand fake George Floyd videos to incite riots because “the ends justify the means”. People have been flooding the internet with lies all along -- and, indeed, sometimes incite riots with those lies. I get it: there are new ways to lie now, and some will be more susceptible because they don't pay attention to the moving target of what's possible with deepfake technology. But adding one more way to lie to the existing pile of a thousand ways doesn't change the balance, especially since the effectiveness of a lie doesn't depend on its believability, but on whether it tells a story the listener wants to believe.