4 ms·

I agree, but I think deep fake type technology is neutral. Some technology isn't. Deep fakes aren't the issue here. This same thing could have been done before

• sim7c00 3y ago
  you can also kill someone with your hands or a knife, that doesnt make guns less deadly. perhaps theres good use cases for deep fake tech, but realising people will use technologies for their own use cases instead the one you envisioned i think is important. That being said, this is a difficult topic and i suppose both sides xn have valid arguments. guns also save lives for instance. (sorry for keepong to use the gun example but i think ite easy relatable maybe a not a perfect example)
• palata 3y ago
  > I agree, but I think deep fake type technology is neutral. Some technology isn't. That's probably a valid argument, but you should elaborate. What does this particular technology bring to society that balances for deep fakes that can destroy someone's life? Cryptography can protect people, which sounds like a good thing, but it can protect bad actors, which is a bad thing. One could debate it, but overall it feels like cryptography is useful in many cases. On the other hand, I feel like we would be better off without e.g. blockchain or without e.g. SpaceX making space flights affordable for businesses in a world where the climate crisis may soon destroy us. What about deep fakes then? What good does it bring that would balance the bad use-cases?