4 ms·
I wouldn't say we'd be quite back to pre-photo evidence days. I feel a lot if not most of the value in a video/audio recording is not just that the medium has t
by Ukv 2y ago
I wouldn't say we'd be quite back to pre-photo evidence days. I feel a lot if not most of the value in a video/audio recording is not just that the medium has traditionally been difficult to edit, but that it's attesting to a lot of details with high specificity. There's a lot to potentially get caught out on with not a lot of wiggle room when inconsistencies are spotted (compared to recalling from memory). Document scans and static images are still useful despite having long been trivial to edit, for instance.
- dartos 2y agoI think forensic analysis of photographs would reveal pretty quickly if they’re AI anyway. AI images of real life still don’t pass intense scrutiny.
- wongarsu 2y agoAnd we have been able to edit photos nearly as long as we have been able to make them. Yet photo evidence continues being useful
- philipov 2y agoI won't deny that genAI is still a long way from passing the strictest scrutiny, but I don't like the above argument. Ease of use is not a trivial matter, and extreme advances in accessibility can cause a phase-change. Photo evidence continues to be useful because editing photos is below the critical threshold for becoming a problem. If it becomes easy, low-skill, and reliable, at that point we will cross into the realm of Reasonable Doubt. It's the difference between possible, and practical, and pervasive.
- throwway120385 2y agoIt's just another thing you'll have to pay for as the defendant.
- ykonstant 2y agoRight... forensics, the famously reliable discipline.
- dartos 2y agoYou can entirely remove the word “forensics” and my statement would be the same…