3 ms·

> I think we may eventually get camera authentication as a result of this, probably legally enforced in the same way and for similar reasons as Japan enforced t

> I think we may eventually get camera authentication as a result of this, probably legally enforced in the same way and for similar reasons as Japan enforced that digital camera shutters have to make a noise. Maybe, but I'm not bullish on cryptology having a solution to this problem. Every consumer device that's interesting enough to be worth hacking gets hacked within a few years. Even if nobody ever steals the key there will inevitably be side-channel attacks to feed external pictures into the camera that it thinks are coming from its own sensors. And then there's the problem of the US government, which is known to strongarm CAs into signing fraudulent certificates. > 200 years ago there were about 1 billion people on earth; now there are about 8 billion. Anarchoprimitivists and degrowth people make a similar handwave about the advances of the last 200 years, but they're important to holding up the systems which keep a lot of people alive. I think that's a good argument against the kazinksy-ites, but I was primarily speaking towards concerns such as 'misinformation' and machines pushing humans out of jobs. We're still going to have food, medicine, and shelter. AI can't take that away; the only concern is adapting our society so that we can either feed significant populations of unproductive people, or move those people into whatever jobs machines can't do yet. We might be teetering on the edge of a dystopian techno-feudalism where a significant portion of the population languishes in slums because industry has no use for them, but that's why I said we need to adapt. There has always been something that has the potential to destroy civilization in the near future, but if you're reading this post then your ancestors weren't the ones that failed to adapt.

ben_w 2y ago
> Maybe, but I'm not bullish on cryptology having a solution to this problem. Every consumer device that's interesting enough to be worth hacking gets hacked within a few years. Even if nobody ever steals the key there will inevitably be side-channel attacks to feed external pictures into the camera that it thinks are coming from its own sensors. Or the front-door analog route, point a real camera at a screen showing fake images. That said, lots of people are incompetent at forging, about knowing what "tells" each process of fakery has and how to overcome them, so I think this will still broadly work. > We might be teetering on the edge of a dystopian techno-feudalism where a significant portion of the population languishes in slums because industry has no use for them, but that's why I said we need to adapt. That's underestimating the impact this can have. An AI which reaches human performance and speed on 250 watt hardware, at current global average electricity prices, costs about the same to run as a human costs just to feed. By coincidence, the global electricity supply is currently about 250 watts/capita.
mywittyname 2y ago
Encryption doesn't need to last forever, just long enough to be scrutinized. Once a trusted individual is convinced that a certain camera took this picture at this time and location, then that authentication is forever. Maybe that trust only includes devices built in the past 5 years, as hacks and bugs are fixed. Or corroborating evidence can be gathered; say several older, "potentially untrustworthy" devices take very similar video of an event. As with most things, the primary issue is not really a technical one. People will believe fake photos and not believe real ones based on their own biases. So even if we had the Perfect Technology, it wouldn't necessarily matter. And this is the reason we have fallen into a dystopian feudalistic society (we aren't teetering). The weak link is our incompetent collective human brains. And a handful of people built the tools necessary to exploit that incompetence; we aren't going back.
- whiplash451 2y ago
  > People will believe fake photos and not believe real ones based on their own biases. People, maybe. Judges, much less so. The "perfect technology" is badly needed if we don't want things to go south at scale.
  - bryanrasmussen 2y ago
    >Judges, much less so. Judges appointed by whom? Anyway, Judges are human and I think there is enough evidence throughout history of judges showing bias.

ben_w 2y ago

> Maybe, but I'm not bullish on cryptology having a solution to this problem. Every consumer device that's interesting enough to be worth hacking gets hacked within a few years. Even if nobody ever steals the key there will inevitably be side-channel attacks to feed external pictures into the camera that it thinks are coming from its own sensors. Or the front-door analog route, point a real camera at a screen showing fake images. That said, lots of people are incompetent at forging, about knowing what "tells" each process of fakery has and how to overcome them, so I think this will still broadly work. > We might be teetering on the edge of a dystopian techno-feudalism where a significant portion of the population languishes in slums because industry has no use for them, but that's why I said we need to adapt. That's underestimating the impact this can have. An AI which reaches human performance and speed on 250 watt hardware, at current global average electricity prices, costs about the same to run as a human costs just to feed. By coincidence, the global electricity supply is currently about 250 watts/capita.

mywittyname 2y ago

Encryption doesn't need to last forever, just long enough to be scrutinized. Once a trusted individual is convinced that a certain camera took this picture at this time and location, then that authentication is forever. Maybe that trust only includes devices built in the past 5 years, as hacks and bugs are fixed. Or corroborating evidence can be gathered; say several older, "potentially untrustworthy" devices take very similar video of an event. As with most things, the primary issue is not really a technical one. People will believe fake photos and not believe real ones based on their own biases. So even if we had the Perfect Technology, it wouldn't necessarily matter. And this is the reason we have fallen into a dystopian feudalistic society (we aren't teetering). The weak link is our incompetent collective human brains. And a handful of people built the tools necessary to exploit that incompetence; we aren't going back.

whiplash451 2y ago
> People will believe fake photos and not believe real ones based on their own biases. People, maybe. Judges, much less so. The "perfect technology" is badly needed if we don't want things to go south at scale.
- bryanrasmussen 2y ago
  >Judges, much less so. Judges appointed by whom? Anyway, Judges are human and I think there is enough evidence throughout history of judges showing bias.