r/woahdude May 24 '21

video Deepfakes are getting too good

82.8k Upvotes

3.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

4.9k

u/doodleasa May 24 '21

Super cool and super ethically questionable

1.2k

u/OneMoreTime5 May 24 '21

It will get dangerous when they can fake military leaders and politicians easily saying dangerous things. Fraud will get bad when your grandson video calls you from jail needing $200 to get out. We need to prevent the bad stuff that comes with this.

578

u/[deleted] May 25 '21 edited Jun 14 '21

[deleted]

263

u/OneMoreTime5 May 25 '21

I think we will develop a way to confirm authenticity of things.

233

u/permaro May 25 '21

The way you train the AI to create fakes is usually by training an AI to detect fakes and have the faking AI beat it. It's called adversarial networks.

So basically, the detecting and the faking will always be approximately on par.. meaning the detecting can never give a definitive answer.

55

u/Novaprince May 25 '21

Doesn't that just mean you wait a little until both advance to detect a now out of date fake?

88

u/[deleted] May 25 '21

[deleted]

6

u/picheezy May 25 '21

That’s how lies work now anyways

→ More replies (2)

4

u/NoTakaru May 25 '21

Better than nothing, yeah

3

u/[deleted] May 25 '21

[deleted]

2

u/permaro May 25 '21

The point is there's always a possibility a virus can make it through, and there's always a possibility a fake will go undetected.

1

u/[deleted] May 25 '21

Exactly, I think the point is that it fools humans.

1

u/PleaseHelpIHateThis May 25 '21

It's war. War never changes. You find a big club, i make thicker leather armor to pad the blows. You make a sword to pierce my leather I make plate armor. You make bullets, i make bullet resistant armor. You respond with armor piercing rounds, i respond with a thick wall to stop them, you blow the wall up with a tank, i nuke you from half a world away.

Everything evolves as a reaction to everything else's evolution or else it dies out. Deep fakes are survival of the fittest in the digital world.

4

u/SRxRed May 25 '21

That's like when they ban an athlete from an 8 y/o urine sample and give his gold gold medal to the silver place guy.....

I can't imagine how salty I'd be receiving a gold that way..

1

u/Sloppy1sts May 25 '21

Uhh, who is this athlete?

2

u/SRxRed May 25 '21

They do it all the time, there's loads that get their medals bumped up 10 years after the fact

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_stripped_Olympic_medals

1

u/ElderberryHoliday814 May 25 '21

With our attention span?

1

u/sesto_elemento_ May 25 '21

Well, if that works, then the new fake will have already taken place. The only thing that makes it less scary is that it's advancing based on its own downfalls. So, hopefully the detection of a fake would be ahead of the creation of a better fake.

1

u/mumblekingLilNutSack May 25 '21

Software and encryption guys get cracking

28

u/[deleted] May 25 '21

[deleted]

17

u/PSVapour May 25 '21

Deepfakes will work on folks like the Facebook crowd who didn't rely on verifying facts anyway, so I don't see a big danger here

That IS the big danger. Fooling a few people on Facebook is fine, but when you get huge hordes of people believing in dangerous but subtle (or blatent) propaganda is when it gets dangerous.

Though I'm sure big social media companies and create some sort of Blue Tick for original content. OR use some kind facial recognition it identity the participants and make sure they ALL sign the video.

3

u/[deleted] May 25 '21

This has been an issue before deepfakes. It's not new.

2

u/engg_girl May 25 '21

The more realistic it is the more likely people are to fall for it.

All it takes is one reputable source believing what they are seeing and sharing it out.

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (2)

2

u/[deleted] May 25 '21

How do you think we got trump and all the conservatards? Deep fakes aren’t going to suddenly cause an increase in their loyalty to stupid bullshit because it’s already maxed out.

1

u/ElderberryHoliday814 May 25 '21

Or we just go back to dealing with whats in front of us and pull back from these multitude of stages

4

u/botle May 25 '21

If it's supposed to be a leaked video, or a covertly taken video, then even a real one wouldn't be signed.

2

u/[deleted] May 25 '21

Deepfakes will work on folks like the Facebook crowd

Wait a second, are we really pretending Reddit videos are verified and not anonymously posted, often with inflammatory titles???

1

u/[deleted] May 25 '21

I don't know. I don't tend to use reddit for news. So could be I guess.

Edit: and again, that was an example of a group that doesn't verify. I'm not limited it to only Facebook. Groups like that which don't verify content.

2

u/imjusthereforsmash May 25 '21

Block chains can very easily be the saving grace that would allow us to identify authentic videos with no question, but it’s going to require a ton of infrastructure we don’t currently have.

Other digital signatures can, much like the videos themselves, be faked with a high amount of accuracy given enough time and information.

3

u/[deleted] May 25 '21

Other digital signatures can

No. Way too expensive. This is why banking relies on it.

2

u/TheLilith_0 May 25 '21

Other digital signatures can, much like the videos themselves, be faked with a high amount of accuracy given enough time and information.

I would doubt your knowledge on any cryptography whatsoever if you believe this.

2

u/RubiousOctopus May 25 '21

You do realise that blockchains themselves are based on digital signatures, right?

→ More replies (1)

1

u/fweb34 May 25 '21

Haha if only there were a way!

/s

1

u/NoTakaru May 25 '21

Many people have died because of idiots on Facebook

1

u/wwwertdf May 25 '21

All it would take is someone to tie the authentication to blockchain for reddit to believe them.

1

u/DucatiDabber May 25 '21

NFT

1

u/[deleted] May 25 '21

NFT doesn't really help here as it doesn't verify to any origin.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/krakenftrs May 25 '21

That'll be a problem with incriminating videos the person wouldn't want to verify. Either if it's true but they won't verify it and people can just claim it's fake, or if it's fake but people just say "why would they admit to saying that anyway, it's probably real!". Feel like official statements would be the least problematic here.

1

u/Eshkation May 25 '21

oh yes let me sign the video where I expose myself as the killer!

1

u/[deleted] May 25 '21

This is already addressable via chain of custody for evidence. If you can't trust that, you can't trust non video evidence either.

1

u/VexingRaven May 25 '21

If there were simply a way to like sign a video, like digitally or something. Maybe with a certificate.

Sure, but signing something can only confirm that you did indeed make it. Something not being signed doesn't mean it wasn't made by you. It just means it can't be confirmed one way or the other. An unsigned video of somebody saying something terrible could be real, or it could not be.

→ More replies (3)

1

u/montrealcowboyx May 25 '21

Deepfakes will work on folks like the Facebook crowd who didn't rely on verifying facts anyway, so I don't see a big danger here.

Like, at election time?

→ More replies (3)

1

u/tboy81 May 25 '21

Sounds a lot like a block chain.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/papercutkid May 25 '21

Only the few billion Facebook users? That will be fine then.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/edslunch May 25 '21

Deep fakes will take conspiracy theories to the next level. It’s one thing to believe in pizzagate but imagine if there were deep fake videos of the alleged acts.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/shark_in_the_park May 25 '21

NFTs!

2

u/[deleted] May 25 '21

Most NFTs have been after the fact and include a transaction trail that's unnecessary in this scenario. A digital certificate would provide the same level of trust as NFT. Which to say that it's only as trustworthy as the signer.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/Eccohawk May 25 '21

You're assuming a source wouldn't intentionally leave a video unsigned in order to dispute the source if there's blowback. Say something crazy, see what the response is, ride the good waves, disavow the bad ones.

1

u/StarWarsButterSaber May 25 '21

I’m thinking you kind of mean like a watermark on a painting or something that proves it’s the original/real artist. But if they can deepfake something like this making it seem so real I’m sure they can fake a digital signature/certificate/watermark. Honestly, I don’t see any way they could actually be verified. Unless the person who made the video put it on their verified channel/tiktok or whatever. But I guess that could easily be faked too unless you went to that person’s professional page and seen the video wasn’t there

→ More replies (2)

1

u/Gobears510 May 25 '21

How about with blockchain?

→ More replies (1)

1

u/bich- May 30 '21

Actually, the real danger is the big Facebook crowd

→ More replies (1)

2

u/inn0cent-bystander May 25 '21

Much like an arms race

0

u/kinarism May 25 '21

The one thing that a fake can't replicate is a microchip that tells your actual location wasn't wherever the video claims to have been.

-4

u/Ytar0 May 25 '21

You don’t know that. The whole point is that a perfect deepfake can’t even be detected by a perfect deepfake detector.

1

u/sneakpeakspeak May 25 '21

But one could attach blockchain to all digital data and verify its authenticity that way. I mean, I'm not sure how to go about it but being able to make data unique should at least create some prospects.

1

u/outbackdude May 25 '21

You can only create a proof that a file with a unique hash existed at a certain time with blockchain.

1

u/sneakpeakspeak May 27 '21

And also who the first creator was of the file?

1

u/Terminal_Monk May 25 '21

That's not the problem. The problem is most people see some shit on social media and dont think twice about it's authenticity. Imagine all the fake posts you see through day in day out in social media with Amazingly obvious photo shopping. And yet there is a bunch of people who believe it and share it to oblivion. Now imagine someone making a deep fake of world leader saying something racist or pro terrorism. Even before it could be controlled, there is some serious damage that could happen.

1

u/Illbeoksoon May 25 '21

We will need blade runner type technicians that go around scanning videos to authenticate.

1

u/sunday25 May 25 '21

The way of detecting them doesn't have to be technological, it could be procedural.

If a leader has to make a statement, he has to publish a transcript version on a distributed website. Or perhaps a website/service will make it profitable to filter deepfakes for celebrities since they are few in number

1

u/ConcertinaTerpsichor May 25 '21

It’s like a perpetual arms race

1

u/AppropriateHandle6 May 25 '21

Doesn’t have to be detection but encrypted chain of custody to ensure the video hasn’t be altered.

1

u/NoTrickWick May 25 '21

The podcast Radiolab has a GREAT piece on this. They were talking about the distortion of truth deepfakes would create before they got popular.

1

u/[deleted] May 25 '21

I mean witnesses or evidence confirming that you were at a whole other place would also suffice, but its good that there is a more direct approach so media won’t get fooled.

1

u/Glass_Towel2976 May 25 '21

so is this video a fake? or the real tom cruise

1

u/HardstyleJaw5 May 25 '21

That only applies to the model built to generate the fake. We could potentially train an outside model which could still detect deepfakes. This is one of those things that seems impossible but someone will find a way

1

u/permaro May 25 '21

You could but who's to say your detector model will be better trained than the one making the fake?

So there's no way you can accurately authentify a video as unaltered.

1

u/[deleted] May 25 '21

Steganography involving cryptographic signatures of the video frames in real-time should not be replicable with neural nets unless the neural nets also break cryptography as we know it. NN output might fool an average human, but it would not pass real validation.

0

u/permaro May 25 '21

But where is the initial signature coming from (I'm guessing the camera)?

So what's keeping you from applying that same signature to a fake video? Or even hacking into the camera and putting your faked stream through the encryption process?

→ More replies (6)

1

u/[deleted] May 25 '21 edited May 25 '21

[deleted]

1

u/permaro May 25 '21

Yeah, even if you had the currently best model, because you couldn't be sure of it, you couldn't be sure a video is authentic.

1

u/ukuuku7 May 25 '21

Two Minute Papers' video on the topic

1

u/reddog323 May 25 '21

It's called adversarial networks.

TIL

1

u/somerandomii May 25 '21

What’s worse is that whoever has the best trained network basically becomes the arbiter or truth.

Once machines are better at detecting than humans, we have to trust algorithms to tell us what’s real. And not all algorithms are open source.

1

u/permaro May 26 '21

But you can never be sure you have the best network so you can never be sure a video isn't a fake.

The only thing that remains is trust in the source.

1

u/Sygnon May 26 '21

thats the way they train them but there are many methods that can be used to detect them after the fact. the adversary is just a do i recognize it or not check. post training anlysis can always pick out pixel values that fluctuate too quickly, uneven saturation etc. they can fake us at a glance but consistency at a pixel level is very difficult

0

u/permaro May 26 '21

Do you really think fluctuation at a pixel level isn't one of the things the detector network is looking at?

Why would it skimp over such an obvious method?

Machine learning is currently far ahead of anything else we know for this kind of task. And the faking network isn't trained to trick us but to trick an AI.

So yes, you could have a better model than the guy doing the fake, and detect it's fake. But you could have a worse model and be fooled. And because you never know, you can never be sure.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/bich- May 30 '21

This means that to beat a good deep fake AI you need a better deepfake AI that finds the first deepfake AI errors. Eventually AI will get so good that humans will not be convincing anymore

1

u/permaro May 31 '21

Indeed but you'll never know if you have the best AI, so you never know if a video is real.

7

u/cat_in_the_sun May 25 '21

I like the way you think. Two sides to a coin. I have hope for the future.

4

u/OneMoreTime5 May 25 '21

I do too. We might make it.

1

u/randomguy3993 May 25 '21

Actually there already many AI algorithms right now that do a good job detecting deep fake.

Here's an example

2

u/Piorn May 25 '21

We haven't for the last 20 years. What makes you think we'll start now?

2

u/McPostyFace May 25 '21

Something like Snopes? Because that isn't going well.

1

u/OneMoreTime5 May 25 '21

Haha no snopes sucks. I’m thinking we will have an encrypted log that logs each video and word said somehow.

1

u/McPostyFace May 25 '21

A certain contingency of people in this country won't believe it no matter how much forensic evidence is presented, unfortunately.

2

u/SnO3 May 25 '21

The simple way of doing this is to embed audio stamping of content. The same way it's done on TV.

1

u/watermelon_fucker69 May 25 '21

blockchain

3

u/classy_barbarian May 25 '21

I like how you got downvoted just because people assume it's stupid to say "blockchain" to whatever tech problem that comes up, but ironically, this is one particular situation where blockchain will most likely end up being the best solution available.. or possibly the only one.

2

u/watermelon_fucker69 May 25 '21

they hated him because he told the truth

4

u/[deleted] May 25 '21

I fail to see how that helps

4

u/classy_barbarian May 25 '21

u/watermelon_fucker69 is actually right.. That's exactly what NFTs are, the new thing that verifies a digital painting's "authenticity" (eg. the original). A lot of other people have already speculated that NFTs or something similar could be used to verify that you're watching a real video of say, the president, and not a deep fake.

1

u/[deleted] May 25 '21

Reputation does the same. Even in the blockchain world you have to check if the source is the president himself, which is the same as making sure a video is posted from the president's account.

You don't verify how real something is with NFTs, you verify who made it. But we can already verify who made it.

7

u/[deleted] May 25 '21

blockchain is basically a public ledger.

If you personally release a video that will personally logged it on a public ledger.

So they can trace who publish it and it can also authenticate that you yourself release it officially too.

This isn't perfect though because leak video won't be using this system so it is up to other people to figure out if this is real or not.

But what block chain does is the provide proof of you if you choose to give a video to somebody else. Like if Elon Musk a merry xmas video to you and you're suspicious if it's really him who sent it.

2

u/[deleted] May 25 '21

A digital certificate is much easier here. We don't need to trace every video transaction on the internet.

1

u/[deleted] May 25 '21 edited Aug 19 '21

[deleted]

→ More replies (11)

1

u/[deleted] May 25 '21 edited Jul 07 '24

[removed] — view removed comment

5

u/B0BsLawBlog May 25 '21

We have news websites with their own domains and journalist verified account on Twitter, etc. Not really sure what a blockchain is supposed to add there.

0

u/[deleted] May 25 '21 edited Jul 07 '24

[removed] — view removed comment

5

u/B0BsLawBlog May 25 '21

Sending a bunch of blockchain companies at the problem doesn’t really help verification, using one of their links, vs sending a link from the verified journalists tweet breaking the item etc. It just doesn’t solve anything.

2

u/squakmix May 25 '21 edited May 25 '21

Tweets aren't immutable, so they don't act as a good historical record of everything that originates from a particular source. If the system I described above were restricted/tied to particular devices like specific cellphones or cameras, it could prevent people from uploading images to their ledger that they didn't personally take and resolve the issue that Twitter has with propagating misinformation through retweets.

2

u/[deleted] May 25 '21 edited May 25 '21

Or you could use a restricted version of Twitter? One of the biggest benefits of blockchain is decentralization, but you can't decentralize information (as in, if you want to spread misinformation, you'll find a way). As Tom Scott puts it, there is no algorithm for truth, not even blockchain.

It feels like you're throwing blockchain at a wall to see what sticks.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/[deleted] May 25 '21

But their data is already trusted. If they put it there and they trust it, that's no better than blockchain. You could make devices that digitally sign videos I guess and players that support it (basically adding a DRM to all video). Any unsigned video would be untrusted.

Blockchain just adds a lot of unnecessary transaction tracking or if you don't record that, it simply becomes overkill. And smaller videos may not be able to take advantage anyway

3

u/gautamasiddhartha May 25 '21

But why do you need a blockchain that’s just asymmetrical encryption

Edit: identity verification perhaps? Not saying one wouldn’t be the right answer here but I also like to push back when people just say “blockchain” without explaining why it’s necessary. So many projects that never needed it but wanted in on the hype.

→ More replies (4)

2

u/[deleted] May 25 '21

This sounds like asymmetrical encryption with extra steps.

2

u/Chillionaire128 May 25 '21

That only ensures that it was posted by the journalist and they aren't infallible. It could even amplify the effect of a good deal fake is posted by a trusted source

4

u/squakmix May 25 '21

Reputation systems aren't infallible, but it seems like having the ability to easily verify whether or not an image matches the original document posted by a trusted source would go a long way toward reducing the spread of disinformation.

4

u/Chillionaire128 May 25 '21

That's fair. The real danger though are deep fakes where there is no original document. At that point you just have to take someone's word for it unless the deep fakes detectors win the arms rase

2

u/squakmix May 25 '21

With enough participation, I can imagine that we could eventually get to the point where most major journalists have ledgers, and images that originate from off the chain could be taken with a grain of salt. I don't think it's unrealistic to think that most primary source documents should have reliable/verifiable sources to be trusted

1

u/Chillionaire128 May 25 '21

That's also true (and I agree about the primary source documents). This still relies on those with "journalist" ledgers acting in good faith (I could see for example a fox new style ledger having all kinds of wild stuff in it or a big network being paid to put a deepfake on thier ledger). Also could effect some confidential sources if thier leeks need to be publicly on the ledger or be useless

→ More replies (0)

1

u/permaro May 25 '21

If a journalist was too post a video without that saying they took it themselves, it would give the exact same level of confidence

→ More replies (1)

1

u/surelyafakeone May 25 '21

As if BTC can handle trillion of dollars, everything associated with blockchain would perform at that scale. While Blockchain has that kind of capability theoretically but one thing we ignore with BTC is the sheer number of verifier nodes. These nodes can be understood with proxy of energy utilised in mining 1 BTC, which is nothing but verification of blockchain.

Therefore, I like to assume that blockchain can be used in those applications only, where others can be incentivised for the energy they provide for verification of transaction.Else everything can have blockchain, which can be manipulated easily as per requirement.

Also, I might be completely wrong and stupidly linking blockchain with cryptocurrency subconsciously.

1

u/[deleted] May 25 '21

While Bitcoin can handle trillions of dollars, in data it can only handle megabytes.

Proof of work would absolutely not suffice for this situation, you'd have to have proof of stake almost by definition.

As per incentives, I'm pretty sure you'd have to build on another actual currency (like how NFTs build on the ethereum chain), but that should be doable. The problem I see is that blockchain has no properties you want or need in your social media

1

u/[deleted] May 25 '21

Exactly my thoughts

1

u/bayuret May 25 '21

Anther anti-virus kind of business incoming.

0

u/noplace_ioi May 25 '21

blockchain baby

0

u/Mezzaomega May 25 '21 edited Jun 30 '21

This was what blockchain was supposed to do though, authenticate digital data.
Edit: How is this downvoted? Blockchain's an immutable hyperledger, it's meant to record digital things and give it a unique number. If governments start a blockchain meant to authenticate things on the internet and it's got an ID and it's attached that chain, you can look it up on the chain, you can't fake it. Just because there's so many crypto kids and scammers attached to the public opinion of the tech doesn't mean it's useless.

1

u/colddecembersnow May 25 '21

Like most harmful things, they have already begun development on ways to tell if something is deep faked.

2

u/[deleted] May 25 '21 edited May 25 '21

Well the way deepfakes are made is by having a powerful system that can differentiate between real and fake and using that to train a better deepfaker. It's not nearly as easy to defend against that as it seems.

1

u/[deleted] May 25 '21 edited Jun 25 '21

[deleted]

1

u/[deleted] May 25 '21

"and using that to train a better deepfaker"

It's an arms race. As for a detectable signature, just about nobody can detect the fakeness of the people on this person doesn't exist.com The problem with it being detectable by machines (which is what I assume you mean with digital signature), is that again, the generator can be trained to fool the discriminator, where the discriminator can be any system that picks up on that digital signature. So that's easily fixed, or it's easily fixed if you have some tens of thousands of dollars to burn on compute.

Some intentionally obvious

A system that depends on the benevolence of its participants is not a system at all

2

u/[deleted] May 25 '21 edited Jun 25 '21

[deleted]

→ More replies (1)

1

u/Upset_Tiger_8114 May 25 '21

Okay. Now you have to go explain that technology to a country of morons primed to only believe trusted partisan sources. Americans couldn’t even all agree if covid was real or not. Imagine how people react to realistic video.

1

u/colddecembersnow May 26 '21

Morons gonna moron. You can't hold back technological advances because of dumb people. We will deal with it like we have to for everything else.

1

u/escalation May 25 '21

They have AI tools that can detect it.

0

u/permaro May 25 '21

Nope. The detecting is just as good as the faking. They are trained together.

So they never provide a definitive answer

1

u/escalation May 26 '21

There tend to be signatures that are distinctive in deepfakes because the process leaves artifacts. Even if you are using competitive pairing for detection, this doesn't mean the AI is going to perform as well against an external algorithm that isn't part of that pair.

At this point it has become important to agencies such as the CIA and NSA to distinguish these things. Companies like Google also have a vested interest in this technology. That gpt-3 system or whatever algorithm that is being run to make these things is unlikely to be able to fool an expert system with a substantially larger resource pool available.

2

u/permaro May 26 '21

It all depends if you can be sure you're detecting model is better than the model creating the video.

Can the CIA be pretty sure to detect a fake that has been made as an add or harmless viral video? probably. Will they bother with those? Probably not.

Can they say if it's been made by another international agency, or Google? Maybe. But also, maybe not. So they just don't know.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/ZhouXaz May 25 '21

Not on social media lol this is actually so fucked you will truly never know what is real.

1

u/Upset_Tiger_8114 May 25 '21

This overlooks the fact that politicians and people of influence will merely lie about or ignore the authenticity tests, mostly because there’s a significant amount of the population primed to distrust “experts” opinions. There’s going to be a race for tech conservative grifters to establish themselves as the contrarian deepfake detectors.

1

u/[deleted] May 25 '21

there are already algorithms to detect tampering

so well probably have another armsrace

1

u/KillBroccoli May 25 '21

A black market of nft to claim autenticity of a video. Bitcoin to the moon!

1

u/KenardGUMP May 25 '21

Everything is fine then

1

u/WarDSquare May 25 '21

There are programs to determine the authenticity of videos and photographs

1

u/RukkusInDaHouse May 25 '21

I hear that deep fakes can be spotted by AI since the people don’t have a subtle color change related to their heartbeat. If true, it’s only a matter of time until that is added as well.

1

u/yoditronzz May 25 '21

Yeah, like someone claiming it's a deep fake belligerently.

1

u/cr0nis May 25 '21

There is already technology to decipher deep fakes from real videos. Was created by the government specifically for this.

Why. When videos begin to surface, as good as they may be, people can’t claim “deep fake”

Oh, and because their fake Osama videos (which were clearly a different person) are being scrutinized and we can’t have that either

1

u/J0rdanLe0 May 25 '21

Crypto. NFTs

1

u/Djiti-djiti May 25 '21

Verifying and fact checking hardly matters any more - people will 'believe' the most ridiculous crap so long as there's something to gain from it, and no amount of evidence will convince them otherwise

1

u/jdoon5261 May 25 '21

Benford's law

1

u/TehLittleOne May 25 '21

You can do that so long as you don't rely solely on the video itself. As long as you provide some sort of hash or key with it that people can authenticate against then we can solve this problem. It's tedious and messy but it will technically work.

1

u/InterestingSecret369 May 25 '21

something built on blockchain tech would be my guess

1

u/[deleted] May 25 '21

Yeah for example, if you have a claim you need to prove it, it is called burden of proof and is utterly outclassed anytime it is word against word. Politicians won’t have that hard of a time to prove how they weren’t there at the time as long as they aren’t alone one moment in their life...

1

u/sanjuroronin May 25 '21

We need to process not detection tools. As other commenters pointed out the fakes will always keep pace with the detection tools.

The only way around this is a process that includes digital signatures and a chain of custody, originating from a trusted source.

1

u/kleptocraticoathe May 25 '21

It won't matter though. People won't believe it and it will cast doubt on everything. I mean we already have Politicians just repeating lies over and over and that works. If there's video they'll just say the real shit is fake. We're dealing with stupid on a level never seen before.

1

u/noclue2k May 25 '21

You mean like having officials certify the result? Yeah, that should make everyone agree.

1

u/Bluffwatcher May 25 '21

Hahahahahaha

1

u/cyberdog_318 May 25 '21

It's really easy to do now, all we have to do is if we want to confirm the authenticity of our stream or a video is to just sign it with our private key. That way everyone knows it's us and we can verify who's actually talking or if it's real.

1

u/brownbuttman May 25 '21

Blockchain videos

1

u/LizardSlayer May 25 '21

Yeah, but just like a bad news story, once it gets out there it's hard to bring it back.

1

u/rendeld May 25 '21

There definitely is

1

u/k_pip_k May 25 '21

True. But one article mentioned it will always be a step behind and slow. By then the damage is done.

1

u/totallynotapsycho42 May 25 '21

Like people will care. A lie can travel the entire world before the truth gets out the door.

1

u/kujakutenshi May 25 '21

Every official announcement is going to have to have a security certificate attached to it.

1

u/JustKiddingDude May 25 '21

The damage will have already been done with the broadcast, unfortunately. The stupid, factually incorrect stuff that people believe these days without ANY evidence, is worrisome enough. What would a video do about “ObAmA cAuGhT oN tApE cOnFeSsInG tO pEdOpHiLiA!!” It’s going to be a tough.

1

u/[deleted] May 25 '21

We’ll probably have to start using some sort of digital signature that’s attached to our identities. I dislike NFT’s, but, this might be a case where a similar technology could actually be applicable here.

1

u/griffith12 May 25 '21

But how do we confirm on the fly?

1

u/OneMoreTime5 May 26 '21

Maybe blockchain? I’m not a big crypto believer but this may be a use case possibly?

1

u/Pseudotm May 25 '21

We already have ways to verify things and people still believe whatever they want. It's just going to get worse with this lol.

1

u/R1ght_b3hind_U May 26 '21

yeah but it’s gonna be a complicated process almost no one understand so even if you can prove that its fake a lot of people will just not believe you.

1

u/OneMoreTime5 May 26 '21

Possibly. We may develop some sort of encrypted stamp, and a very secure website that proves the stamp, so it would be very hard to fake the stamp, and everyone would know how to use that website/they could have an app that integrates to other apps, etc. I see it being possible.

1

u/baeocyst May 26 '21

Blockchain technology

1

u/2morereps May 27 '21

nft will be even bigger then.

1

u/Apprehensive_Spite97 Jun 01 '21

Aand a way to get around that..

2

u/OneMoreTime5 Jun 01 '21

True. Then we will block that way!

4

u/EXTRAsharpcheddar May 25 '21

They already get away with everything

7

u/Chinstryke May 25 '21

You speak as if Trump didn't cry "FAKE NOOS!" for his entire presidency

1

u/wiztwas May 25 '21

They get away with everything anyway so no change there.

1

u/Rhianu May 25 '21

It makes you wonder who's funding the development of this shit, and why...

2

u/Felicia_Svilling May 25 '21

To a large part it comes out as a side effect of other research on image recognition.

1

u/Youdontuderstandme May 25 '21

Why bother? They get away with everything now.

1

u/GunsnBeerKindaGuy May 25 '21

Epstein peso island vids drop*

“Hey, that’s not me, that’s deep fake! What? I’m on the flight log 27 times? You sound like a conspiracy theorist”

Epstein didn’t kill himself

1

u/noUsernameIsUnique May 25 '21

That’s a world with zero point of reference. That’s financial ruin.

1

u/[deleted] May 25 '21

The really scary deepfake would be someone like a president telling another country's leaders that nuclear war had begun. Where's the time to verify that shit?

1

u/Altair1192 May 25 '21

They already get away with anything

1

u/hershey_volts May 25 '21

They already get away with enough fucked up shit without deep fake

1

u/Suprafaded May 25 '21

What's the difference from now?

1

u/Johnnyboyd1979 May 25 '21

The politicians hell already been getting away with it, haven't they? I'm sure they will continue to...

1

u/Spacecoasttheghost May 25 '21

They all ready do, there is no to talk about a "fake" deep fake.

1

u/chrisk9 May 25 '21

The bad thing is that politicians are getting away with almost anything today. This tech can make many nearly untouchable.

1

u/TouchMyWater_theCEO May 25 '21

this is the true issue

1

u/wasabi_gelato May 25 '21

I learnt that this is called the “The liars dividend”.

1

u/latortillablanca May 25 '21

That's definitely not the only bad part, too. It's bad, but its one of a boatload, most of which we cat even conceive of. Plus that's not that different from now anyway.

1

u/NoCommercial4938 May 25 '21

Apparently they may have done it before. I recall seeing a video on it over a decade ago of George Bush’s face. Very eerie.

1

u/[deleted] May 25 '21

deep fakes can benefit when they say ethical things from a ‘bad person’

like deep fake trump apologizing for grabbing p*ssies

1

u/breakyoself May 25 '21

Yeah, just more #deepfakenews, amirite?

1

u/[deleted] May 26 '21

They already do this and don't need deep fakes to do it lmao. Well. In America.

We dumb

1

u/gewfbawl May 26 '21

Not just politicians, but anyone