Live data from Hacker News

Underestimating the mind-warping potential of fake video

vox.com

1–10 of 197 posts

Re: Underestimating the mind-warping potential of fake video

#6
But not fake narratives, fake writing or fake news.

Convenient that new media celebrities and individuals have greatest audience creation power through video, whereas traditional media still holds sway in print / news.

So clearly, understand the origins of the narrative that "fake video" is more dangerous: creator videos are stealing mindshare from traditional media. So of course trad media wants to believe it's dangerous. Because it is dangerous to them. But not for the reasons it pretends. At least not more than fakery in trad media.

Which there is plenty of. Including disguising a defense of their (failing?) business model, as a moral polemic, a subliminal plea that you need to trust "authority" outlets like them, more.

But funny how the concentration of "authority" power, which occurs in places like fact check /snopes, is the very thing those places pretend to be against.

Better in this distributed age to trust a sea of independent creators than a few authority sites, right? Even if the creators are all russian bots the concentrated few could all be pushing a single line.

Or maybe people should just trust themselves, and their own experience. And get more of that, instead of more exposure to media.

Re: Underestimating the mind-warping potential of fake video

#7
post #4

Do we need digital signing on every image/video in the news?

I like it. Maybe a system similar to certificates used in https. So trusted partners signing photos and videos, maybe news agencies. The partners will be careful because there existence depends on this trust system.

We will still have un-trusted photos and videos, but they can be recognized as such. Maybe browsers can add a small default 'logo' to an image or video, like the green lock now next to urls.

Re: Underestimating the mind-warping potential of fake video

#10
post #7
post #4

Do we need digital signing on every image/video in the news?

I like it. Maybe a system similar to certificates used in https. So trusted partners signing photos and videos, maybe news agencies. The partners will be careful because there existence depends on this trust system. We will still have un-trusted photos and videos, but they can be recognized as such. Maybe browsers can add a small default 'logo' to an image or video, like the green lock now next to urls.

> The partners will be careful because there existence depends on this trust system.

Th3 partners will be careful to not make waves. This does not mean they'll report the truth.

Post reply on HN