4 ms·

Blockchain Based Anti-Deepfake Proposal

1 points by pbear2k23 3y ago

senttoschool 3y ago
No. Obama can just release the transcript on the official white house website instead of storing it on multiple blockchains.
- pbear2k23 3y ago
  The official white house website is vulnerable to being DNS hijacked or shelled.
  - wigger 3y ago
    [flagged]
  - senttoschool 3y ago
    And blockchains are vulnerable to 51% attacks, especially small ones. In fact, someone can hack the blockchain "writer" that the white houses uses and push a fake transcript. If the white house security can be hacked, what makes you think the hackers can't just hack the wallets/tools that the white house uses to push the transcript to blockchains?
  - theamk 3y ago
    Even if whitehouse website got hacked, people would quickly fix it. No so with blockchain - one compromised staffer's computer and blockchain has bad information in it, forever.
    - senttoschool 3y ago
      That's right. Blockchains are actually hugely impractical.
keikobadthebad 3y ago
It's a memetic disease akin to religion how many person-years of time have been wasted trying to find a use for blockchain lock-in.
- pbear2k23 3y ago
  Fast blockchains with sub-second block times actually fit. I agree that most implementations of blockchain are awful - but this just technically makes use of the nature of its immutability - and would showcase Ricardian contracts (600+ pages of text) versus smart contracts (garbled memos)
  - keikobadthebad 3y ago
    Is everyone (third parties filming a politician or celeb on their own device) going to sign their videos and pay gas fees just in case someone else deepfakes it? No.
    - jprete 3y ago
      Someone concerned about this is likely to do first-party filming and sign that instead. Of course it’s still word against word unless the camera itself implements the signing protocol.
      - theamk 3y ago
        .. and in this case, you would not need blockchain, just timestamping server (for example RFC 3161 compliant one) Probably want multiple servers from multiple countries, to ensure both redundancy and trust. After all, the requests are cheap and small enough.
  - theamk 3y ago
    I'd say for that specific example (confirming President's official speeches), regular public/private key systems signed by official key published by the White House would work even better. As GP said, you are trying to answer a question: "How do I apply blockchain here". This is never a right question, you should instead be asking: "which technology will allow to solve this problem in the most optimal way according to users".
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

1 points by pbear2k23 3y ago

No. Obama can just release the transcript on the official white house website instead of storing it on multiple blockchains.

pbear2k23 3y ago
The official white house website is vulnerable to being DNS hijacked or shelled.
- wigger 3y ago
  [flagged]
- senttoschool 3y ago
  And blockchains are vulnerable to 51% attacks, especially small ones. In fact, someone can hack the blockchain "writer" that the white houses uses and push a fake transcript. If the white house security can be hacked, what makes you think the hackers can't just hack the wallets/tools that the white house uses to push the transcript to blockchains?
- theamk 3y ago
  Even if whitehouse website got hacked, people would quickly fix it. No so with blockchain - one compromised staffer's computer and blockchain has bad information in it, forever.
  - senttoschool 3y ago
    That's right. Blockchains are actually hugely impractical.

keikobadthebad 3y ago

It's a memetic disease akin to religion how many person-years of time have been wasted trying to find a use for blockchain lock-in.

pbear2k23 3y ago
Fast blockchains with sub-second block times actually fit. I agree that most implementations of blockchain are awful - but this just technically makes use of the nature of its immutability - and would showcase Ricardian contracts (600+ pages of text) versus smart contracts (garbled memos)
- keikobadthebad 3y ago
  Is everyone (third parties filming a politician or celeb on their own device) going to sign their videos and pay gas fees just in case someone else deepfakes it? No.
  - jprete 3y ago
    Someone concerned about this is likely to do first-party filming and sign that instead. Of course it’s still word against word unless the camera itself implements the signing protocol.
    - theamk 3y ago
      .. and in this case, you would not need blockchain, just timestamping server (for example RFC 3161 compliant one) Probably want multiple servers from multiple countries, to ensure both redundancy and trust. After all, the requests are cheap and small enough.
- theamk 3y ago
  I'd say for that specific example (confirming President's official speeches), regular public/private key systems signed by official key published by the White House would work even better. As GP said, you are trying to answer a question: "How do I apply blockchain here". This is never a right question, you should instead be asking: "which technology will allow to solve this problem in the most optimal way according to users".

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]