3 ms·

We already rely on chains of trust going back to the original source, and will still. I find these alarmist posts a bit mystifying – before photography, anyone

by dwb 3y ago

We already rely on chains of trust going back to the original source, and will still. I find these alarmist posts a bit mystifying – before photography, anyone could fake a quote of anyone, and human civilisation got quite far. We had a bit over a hundred years where phographic-quality images were possible and very hard to fake (which did and still does vary with technology), but clearly now we’re past that. We’ll manage!

BobaFloutist 3y ago
Yeah I mean tabloids have been fooling people with doctored photos for decades. Potentially we'll need slightly tighter regulations on formal press (so that people that care for accurate information have a place they can get it) and definitely we'll want to steer the culture back towards holding them accountable for misinformation, but credulous people have always had easy access to bad information. I'm much more worried at the potential abuse cases that involve ordinary people that aren't public figures, and have much less ability to defend themselves. Heck, even celebrities are a more vulnerable targets than politicians.
marcusverus 3y ago
Presidential elections are frequently pretty close. Taking the electoral college into account (not the popular vote, which doesn't matter) Donald Trump won the 2016 election by a grand total of ~80,000 votes in three states[0]. Knowing that retractions rarely get viral exposure, it's not difficult to imagine that a few sufficiently-viral videos could swing enough votes to impact a presidential election. Especially when considering that the average person is not up to speed on the current state of the tech, and so has not been prompted to build up the mindset that's required to fend off this new threat. [0] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/12/01/donald-trump-will-be-president-thanks-to-80000-people-in-three-states/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/12/01/do...
- dwb 3y ago
  Plausible. I was thinking over the longer-term.
woleium 3y ago
The issue is better phrased as “how will we survive the transition while some folk still believe the video they are seeing is irrefutable proof the event happened?”
GeoAtreides 3y ago
In the before times we didn't have social media and its algorithms and reach. Does it matter that the chains of trust debunk a viral lie 24 hours after it had spread? Not that there's a lot of trust in the chains of trust to begin with. And if you still have trust, then you're not the target of the viral lie. And if you still have trust, then how long can you hold on that trust when the lies keep coming 24/7 one after another without end. As one movie critic once put it: You might not have noticed it, but your brain did. Very malleable this brain of ours. The civilization might be fine, sure. Now, democracy, on the other hand...

by dwb 3y ago

BobaFloutist 3y ago

Yeah I mean tabloids have been fooling people with doctored photos for decades. Potentially we'll need slightly tighter regulations on formal press (so that people that care for accurate information have a place they can get it) and definitely we'll want to steer the culture back towards holding them accountable for misinformation, but credulous people have always had easy access to bad information. I'm much more worried at the potential abuse cases that involve ordinary people that aren't public figures, and have much less ability to defend themselves. Heck, even celebrities are a more vulnerable targets than politicians.

marcusverus 3y ago

Presidential elections are frequently pretty close. Taking the electoral college into account (not the popular vote, which doesn't matter) Donald Trump won the 2016 election by a grand total of ~80,000 votes in three states[0]. Knowing that retractions rarely get viral exposure, it's not difficult to imagine that a few sufficiently-viral videos could swing enough votes to impact a presidential election. Especially when considering that the average person is not up to speed on the current state of the tech, and so has not been prompted to build up the mindset that's required to fend off this new threat. [0] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/12/01/donald-trump-will-be-president-thanks-to-80000-people-in-three-states/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/12/01/do...

dwb 3y ago
Plausible. I was thinking over the longer-term.

woleium 3y ago

The issue is better phrased as “how will we survive the transition while some folk still believe the video they are seeing is irrefutable proof the event happened?”

GeoAtreides 3y ago

In the before times we didn't have social media and its algorithms and reach. Does it matter that the chains of trust debunk a viral lie 24 hours after it had spread? Not that there's a lot of trust in the chains of trust to begin with. And if you still have trust, then you're not the target of the viral lie. And if you still have trust, then how long can you hold on that trust when the lies keep coming 24/7 one after another without end. As one movie critic once put it: You might not have noticed it, but your brain did. Very malleable this brain of ours. The civilization might be fine, sure. Now, democracy, on the other hand...