If we are going to mark news and tweets as "out of context" or "altered video" I would like a link to be included to the original full source so I can see it for myself.
Twitter to label deepfakes and other deceptive media
21–30 of 151 posts
Re: Twitter to label deepfakes and other deceptive media
#22Would not surprise me when, eventually, browsers are going to mark content as fake. If there's DBs of ad networks, there might also be DBs of deepfakes.
New ad networks are not continuously automatically generated. I think DBs will be an impossible way to do it, as they will always lag far behind. Automatic detection is probably the only possibility, and it is likely to become very fallible as the generated content gets better.
Re: Twitter to label deepfakes and other deceptive media
#23If we are going to mark news and tweets as "out of context" or "altered video" I would like a link to be included to the original full source so I can see it for myself.
[deleted]
Re: Twitter to label deepfakes and other deceptive media
#24Earlier quoted context omitted.
1. How is allowing the unchecked proliferation of false and misleading media not also a slippery slope, and why is that never a concern? 2. False dichotomy - Twitter attempting to label deepfakes and deceptive media has no negative effect on critical thinking or education, just as Twitter not doing has no positive effect on either. Twitter is not setting education policy for any society or government, here. 3. There…
> 1. How is allowing the proliferation of false and misleading media not also a slippery slope, and why is that never a concern? we have had this for the past 400 years (since the birth of the modern press). why do we need it now? how did you, for example, simply decide you can't rely on other people's good judgement? what triggered this change?
It's been a concern all that time? "Yellow journalism" was a term coined in the 1890s. Wars have been started by propaganda.
> how did you, for example, simply decide you can't rely on other people's good judgement?
I'm not sure what this means - I find I have to rely on the judgement of others simply in order to get on, as there isn't enough time to evaluate everything myself and it would be irresponsible to conclude that it's all false. That line of reasoning leads to concluding that Chicago doesn't exist because I've never seen it.
But I need to be incresingly careful about whose judgement I trust and in what subjects.
Re: Twitter to label deepfakes and other deceptive media
#25Would not surprise me when, eventually, browsers are going to mark content as fake. If there's DBs of ad networks, there might also be DBs of deepfakes.
The problem with is always how do you tell if something is actually fake.
Most of the time it ends up with Truth = Deep Pockets, i.e CNN, NY Times, Fox News, MSNBC, LA Times, etc are all "True" even if they do spread false info.
and Random YouTuber's or Blogs are labeled as "Fake" if if the info is true.
Re: Twitter to label deepfakes and other deceptive media
#26Based on twitter engineering reliability and how well Twitter deals with reports, I'd give every flagged image about a 50% change to be real.
The other 50% will be obvious jokes.
Re: Twitter to label deepfakes and other deceptive media
#271. how is this not a slippery slope? 2. have we completely given up on critical thinking and education? 3. free speech vs not so free speech. i guess we're choosing "not so free"?
1. How is allowing the unchecked proliferation of false and misleading media not also a slippery slope, and why is that never a concern? 2. False dichotomy - Twitter attempting to label deepfakes and deceptive media has no negative effect on critical thinking or education, just as Twitter not doing has no positive effect on either. Twitter is not setting education policy for any society or government, here. 3. There…
>>Also, Twitter is a privately owned platform, not a government or a public square.
This is a terrible argument and people need to stop, at least you did not all use the trite "can't yell fire" non-sense but "they are a private company" is right up there with that.
>>Also, merely classifying data is not preventing its spread,
It is highly unlikely that this stops at just classification and tagging. I am sure there is some element of Suppression as well
Re: Twitter to label deepfakes and other deceptive media
#28Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 1. How is allowing the proliferation of false and misleading media not also a slippery slope, and why is that never a concern? we have had this for the past 400 years (since the birth of the modern press). why do we need it now? how did you, for example, simply decide you can't rely on other people's good judgement? what triggered this change?
>we have had this for the past 400 years (since the birth of the modern press). why do we need it now? We've also had experts and arbiters of truth for 400 years. Why do we need to abandon the premise that truth has value in civil society? >how did you, for example, simply decide you can't rely on other people's good judgement? what triggered this change? I personally have never made any such decision. Trust is unavo…
>>> Why do we need to abandon the premise that truth has value in civil society?
The very same people that are for these types of rules have abandoned it. With things like "there is no one truth, only my truth" believing that there is more than 1 "truth"
Most of the time that type of narrative is being pushed by the same people that desire the tech companies to suppress certain kinds of speech
>>If you choose not to trust Twitter, you inevitably choose to trust the source, or the community, or your own bias
It has never been the case that you should trust anyone. No Twitter, or the new agencies or anyone. This is why people should be encouraged to look at original sources and multiple sources. This is also why in the age of everyone having only "anonymous sources said" is a huge problem.
The other problem is most news is just regulations of another outlet or the "news media" takes a single random tweet from some random person and runs 100 nearly duplicated stories sensationalized based on that single account with no verification.
>>whether algorithms are any better at determining truthiness than the web zeitgeist.
This has been tried many many times before, it always fails and this too will fail
Re: Twitter to label deepfakes and other deceptive media
#29You don't need advanced AI to create hyper realistic deep fake news. You just need to take a picture of X candidate, stick a made up quote beneath them, and put it on Facebook. There's enough people on social media who will share that without verifying it.
The fake-ness is even more effective, if the said candidate is the originator and controls the narrative.
Re: Twitter to label deepfakes and other deceptive media
#30You don't need advanced AI to create hyper realistic deep fake news. You just need to take a picture of X candidate, stick a made up quote beneath them, and put it on Facebook. There's enough people on social media who will share that without verifying it.
agree. it's more a problem of lack of critical thinking&reading (because this is generally not taught during education) than anything else.
The problem with these kinds of censorship actions is that there is literally no end to it, and it will never solve the real root cause of the problem. It will just suck up resources and people/institutions will keep complaining that they got into trouble because someone took a tweet as a truth...