3 ms·

I think the idea here is that he should treat that image or video the same as an email or text message describing it. It gets real interesting when you're doing

I think the idea here is that he should treat that image or video the same as an email or text message describing it. It gets real interesting when you're doing a real-time deep fake. What even is reality anymore?

majormajor 3y ago
So for parent poster's view that it's not a problem (even reading that charitably as "won't be a problem for long") we have to hope that: 1) everyone in the entire world learns about how easily things can be faked as quickly as possible and 2) everyone has perfectly rational Vulcan control over the emotions this stuff would provoke on first view? Social engineering is already not that hard, take a minute and imagine how something like this could be presented as a late step as part of a multi-step con to really fuck someone over.
- OkayPhysicist 3y ago
  You can already send somebody's employer a text saying "hey, I know this is rough to hear but so-and-so is sleeping with your wife -A concerned 3rd party". Lying with video will rapidly become equivalent to lying through text.
  - majormajor 3y ago
    Yes, and that and other social engineering tactics have fucked people over plenty of times. So why are we pretending that making it easier to make more visceral and convincing versions of that won't have any bad effects? We already know that there are people who will try to advance their own interests like that, in what world does giving them more tools make their job harder somehow? "A sucker is born every minute" was said pre-computers, after all.
    - pessimizer 3y ago
      > making it easier to make more visceral and convincing versions of that won't have any bad effects? This is not an argument that I see people making. They're saying that sending deepfakes to your job is just plain harassment, and that the photograph, which is only thought of as evidence because it is difficult to fake, will have lost its value as evidence. The invention of photography didn't make it easier to fake narratives, it made it harder.

majormajor 3y ago

So for parent poster's view that it's not a problem (even reading that charitably as "won't be a problem for long") we have to hope that: 1) everyone in the entire world learns about how easily things can be faked as quickly as possible and 2) everyone has perfectly rational Vulcan control over the emotions this stuff would provoke on first view? Social engineering is already not that hard, take a minute and imagine how something like this could be presented as a late step as part of a multi-step con to really fuck someone over.

OkayPhysicist 3y ago
You can already send somebody's employer a text saying "hey, I know this is rough to hear but so-and-so is sleeping with your wife -A concerned 3rd party". Lying with video will rapidly become equivalent to lying through text.
- majormajor 3y ago
  Yes, and that and other social engineering tactics have fucked people over plenty of times. So why are we pretending that making it easier to make more visceral and convincing versions of that won't have any bad effects? We already know that there are people who will try to advance their own interests like that, in what world does giving them more tools make their job harder somehow? "A sucker is born every minute" was said pre-computers, after all.
  - pessimizer 3y ago
    > making it easier to make more visceral and convincing versions of that won't have any bad effects? This is not an argument that I see people making. They're saying that sending deepfakes to your job is just plain harassment, and that the photograph, which is only thought of as evidence because it is difficult to fake, will have lost its value as evidence. The invention of photography didn't make it easier to fake narratives, it made it harder.