Internet’s dead folks, time to get back to the real world! 🥳
Videos are now basically have the same weights as words, no longer a “smoking gun”. Videos basically become like eyewitness testimony, well… its slightly better as it protect against misremembering or people with inadequate lexicon and unable to clearly articulate what they saw. The process wil become: get the witness to testify they had posession of the camera, was recording at the time of incident, and they believe the video being presented in court is genuine and have not been altered, then its basically a video version of their eyewitness testimony. The credibility of the video is now tied to the witness/camera-person’s own credibility, and should not be evaluated as an independent evidence, but the jury should treat the video as the witnese’s own words, meaning, they should factor in the possibility the witness faked it.
A video you see on the internet is now just as good as just a bunch of text, both equally unreliable.
We live in a post-truth world now.
And that’s perfect, that’s the world that made all the due process and similar things evolve.
There’s never been such a thing as independent evidence. The medium has always mattered. And when people started believing this is no more true, we’ve almost gotten ourselves a new planetary fascist empire, I hope we’re still in time to stop that.
Videos are now basically have the same weights as words…
We live in a post-truth world now.
It’s interesting that you start with a bold statement that is IMHO correct, namely that namely what was once taken as unquestionable truth now isn’t, but also it’s not new, just yet another media, but still conclude that it’s different.
Arguably we were already in a post-truth World, always have been, it only extends to a medium we considered too costly to fake until now. The principle is still the same.
In the Middle Ages people believed in creatures nobody had ever seen. And the legal systems and the concepts of knowledge were not very good.
And still the latter evolved to become better long before people started recording sounds to wax cylinders and shooting photos.
In the Middle Ages people believed in creatures nobody had ever seen
FWIW even centuries later, during Linneaus time, people were actually looking for unicorns.
Some people are still looking for yetis and aliens and mountain lake dragons.
A hacker may have replaced the authentic video in the phone. The edit must be unnoticeable to the eyewitness who shot it.
If there’s an edit that alters a detail that doesn’t matter to the witness, it probably isn’t important. And that kind of replacement is hard to do at scale without getting caught.
I’m just thinking, people thought Americans were faking the moon landing, we’ve always had conspiracy theorists. AI just spins them faster and sloppier, let’s go back to humans lying to humans than a computer taught to lie and advertise by humans to do the same thing
🤓 Is this marketing from AI companies? 🦋
Absolutely.
videos need to be cryptographically signed and able to be verified. all news outlets should do this.
Cryptographic signatures are something we should have been normalizing for awhile now.
I remember during the LTT Linux challenge, at one point they were assigned the task “sign a PDF.” Linus interpreted this as PGP sign the document, which apparently Okular can do but he didn’t have any credentials set up. Luke used some online tool to photoshop an image of his handwriting into the document.
agreed. having a cryptography mark on the file and relying on chain of trust is the way.
The NFTs tried to solve this problem already and it didn’t work. You can change the hash/sig of a video file by just changing one pixel on one frame, meaning you just tricked the computer, not the people who use it.
so try again? also: if a pixel changes then it isn’t the original source video, by definition. being able to determine that it has been altered is entirely the point.
The point was to sign AI footage so you know what’s fake. NFTs can be used as a decentralized repository of signatures. You could realistically require the companies to participate, but the idea doesn’t work because you can edit footage so it doesn’t match the signature. More robust signatures exist, but none is good enough, especially since the repo would have to be public.
Signing real footage makes even less sense. You’d have to trust everybody and their uncle’s signature.
The signing keys could be published to DNS, for better or worse.
What would that solve? NFTs don’t have to be powerhungry proof of work, that was just for the monkeys. The public ledger part of this is not the problem.
How can an organization prove that a given key is theirs using NFTs?
A digital signature works with public/private keys and content hashes. This is a solved problem.
In fact, it’s part of secure DNS.
By changing one pixel it’s no longer signed by the original author. What are you trying to say?
Exactly that, if I change a pixel then the cryptographic signature breaks
That’s not really feasible without phones doing this automatically.
Even then didn’t the first Trump admin already argue iPhone video can’t be trusted because it’s modified with AI filters?
… so make the phones do it?
i mean, its not rocket surgery.
Sign every video automatically? Sounds like chatcontrol all over.
Also, I could just generate a video on my computer and film it with my phone. Now it’s signed, even has phone artifacts for added realism.
i think the point is to be able to say “this video was released by X, and X signed it so they must have released it, and you can validate that yourself”. it means if you see a logo that shows CNN, and its signed by CNN, then you know for sure that CNN released it. As a news organisation they should have their own due diligence about sources etc, but they can at least be held to account at that point. versus random ai generated video with a fake logo and fake attribution that is going viral and not being able to be discredited in time before it becomes truth.
then you know for sure that CNN released it.
Why not link to the original CNN source then, if you want to be trusted? You’d have to do that anyways if you want to use the CNN footage in your own video.
I don’t think people who care about the validity of a news video will be helped much with this, and people who don’t care about the truth can easily ignore it too.
As a news organisation they should have their own due diligence about sources etc
But what if they can’t anymore? News orgs don’t only show video that they recorded. They have videos from freelance reporters, people who were at an event, government orgs, other news orgs in other countries…
sure, totally ok to incorporate those video items & publish your (signed) story. i think we’ve seen pretty clesrly that people want to publish and be recognised for their publications. building a web of trust has to start somewhere. currently we’re in the “its all very difficult, we cant solve all the tricky things, so we’re not even trying” stage. hopefully we find a way to move forward, even if its not perfect.
How would that work? Why would you have any reason to trust me in this chain?
deleted by creator
Your eyes are fine. It’s AI that can’t be trusted.
But what if your eyes were secretly replaced by an AI-eye that replace everything you see with real-time generated imagery? 🤔
that’s some serious Laughing Man stuff right there
Then it’s the guy who replaced your eyes that’s untrustworthy.
But what if he was tricked into replacing them by his own AI eyes. It’s untrustworthy eyes all the way down
until you get to the Techno-Necromancers of alpha centari!
Someone doesn’t know what mockumentary or docufiction is. There were lots of fake videos way before AI. This is just amplification because of better accessibility.
It’s the accessibility and scale that’s scary now. Anyone will be able to make convincing fakes of anything from their couch during an ad break on TV. The internet will be essentially useless for getting any useful information because the garbage will outnumber everything else by a million to one.
Commercial web over the years is slowly transforming from education and news into video entertainment platform, this is just next step. I hope AI slop will accelerate transition towards decentralized federated trust ring networks. I also hope it will destroy or at least largely damage current internet / cloud monopolies - google / meta / amazon / microsoft. Maybe public knowledge will be harmed but people will always find the way to pass information without slop.
You see the same panic about 3D printed guns. It’s not that difficult to make a gun at home, but 3D printers makes it slightly more trivial.
I’m just holding out minor hope that people finally get with the program and realize the value of reputable news organizations and plain old grapevine again. Leave internet for nerds.
Meh we’re not there yet. But the day is coming.
“The Running Man” predicted the future!
Is this going to kill Onlyfans?
Or is the market decidedly because Onlyfans is about personal creators and thus it’s more meaningful than porn?
But when short AI videos become so good you can’t tell if you’re being catfished, will it feel the same?
To be fair, if anyone was going to kill Onlyfans, it was Onlyfans. They haven’t yet managed it.
Nothing is true
Everything is permitted
