Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Twitter to label deepfakes and other deceptive media

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 151 posts

Re: Twitter to label deepfakes and other deceptive media

#41

Post by geofft »

ReptileMan wrote: post #31

Truth is too important to let the public decide what is true. I think that twitter doesn't have enough resources to bear this burden alone. So it is better if the state give a helping hand. A dedicated ministry of truth should be there when Twitter cannot hold the line against the ever more devious deceptions. Also since a lot of the speech online is hate speech we should probably also make a state organization that…

This seems reasonable, but I'm a bit worried you're being sarcastic. Are you worried about this for some reason? Maybe scared of something you read in a fiction book once? Is this a good idea in reality?

Re: Twitter to label deepfakes and other deceptive media

#42

Post by pferde »

45ure wrote: post #29
ducttape12 wrote: post #20

You 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.

If a person makes up a quote and distributes it with their own picture, is it really a made-up quote, is it "fake"? :)

Re: Twitter to label deepfakes and other deceptive media

#44

Post by dsfyu404ed »

By allowing us to combine audio, video and text on a whim modern computing technology has opened the door to a whole new kind of communication and like any new form of communication anyone who strongly believes in their cause uses it as a tool to further their cause.

Right now we're going through a rough patch because the effort required to forge images/video is dropping and the old heuristic of "if it's a video it's probably legit" is going out the window. Simultaneously the internet is re-arranging who gets to gate keep mass communication and to what extent. Both these things are going to cause strife.

I think it's useful to remember what the printing press did to Christianity in Europe in the 1500s and what mass literacy did to monarchies in the late 18th through 19th century. Some blood was spilled but I think we can agree the printing press and mass literacy have been massive net positives to civilization.

I won't be losing any sleep over whether TwatBookGram does or doesn't censor anything. It will all work itself out in the end.

Re: Twitter to label deepfakes and other deceptive media

#45

Post by mc32 »

pjc50 wrote: post #35

There are obvious cases of deceptive media, where things are simply made up, but the most invidious ones are just "differential spin" and very hard to pin down. The recent Harry/Megan fiasco has provided a great set of examples on how the same action can be reported as a positive or negative depending on the paper's preferred spin: https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/ellievhall/meghan-markl...

I saw a side by side of an opinion editor of the WaPo. Last year she was saying how important the Iowa caucuses were. This year she said how unimportant they are.

The same person, diametric takes on the same subject. The only difference is I guess her preferred candidate didn’t do as well...

Re: Twitter to label deepfakes and other deceptive media

#46

Post by swebs »

pjc50 wrote: post #35

There are obvious cases of deceptive media, where things are simply made up, but the most invidious ones are just "differential spin" and very hard to pin down. The recent Harry/Megan fiasco has provided a great set of examples on how the same action can be reported as a positive or negative depending on the paper's preferred spin: https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/ellievhall/meghan-markl...

There's a whole subreddit for this with the American media

https://www.reddit.com/r/newscontradictions/top/?sort=top&t=...

Re: Twitter to label deepfakes and other deceptive media

#47

Post by tsukurimashou »

So, where do we exactly draw the line with these things? Considering everything you see on media has been altered in some ways. To me it looks like the same problem as "fake news", how do you define "fake news" considering every piece of news has at least some bias from the person that wrote it.

I think it would be a better idea to educate people about these things, just like when "Photoshop" and other similar software started to pick up, a lot of people started creating "fake images", nowadays I feel like most people are aware that you cannot trust a picture, because they can be so easily edited.

Re: Twitter to label deepfakes and other deceptive media

#48

Post by bilekas »

tsukurimashou wrote: post #47

So, where do we exactly draw the line with these things? Considering everything you see on media has been altered in some ways. To me it looks like the same problem as "fake news", how do you define "fake news" considering every piece of news has at least some bias from the person that wrote it. I think it would be a better idea to educate people about these things, just like when "Photoshop" and other similar softwa…

> I think it would be a better idea to educate people about these things

This argument is nonsense an innefective. Try and explain to your elders about what a deep fake is, and how to identify one.

The movie : "The Irishman" used a lot of the technology successfully to take years off the cast.

Applying labels to known false media is not the same as an opinion based 'fact' or alternative facts.

So don't come with this absolute strawman point of : "Ooo where is the line." - The line is at fake. Always has been. Whats been blurred is the idea that Facts are not Facts.

They are. An opinion is not a fact. A deepFake is Fake. Hence the name. And its about time people grew up and used their intelligence to realise whats a FACT and whats not a FACT. Whats real and whats fake.

It's a shame its up to companies like Twitter to do this for everyone, but clearly too many people believe everything they see & hear without question.

Re: Twitter to label deepfakes and other deceptive media

#49

Post by jug »

I honestly think oversimplified clickbait titles which inspire people to not even read the article but rather generate rings in their echo chamber as they share it is way more dangerous than the occasional deepfake. When are we going to start shaming clickbait?

Hey, another thing in this topic: It would be very cool if a social network could somehow indicate if a shared/retweeted link had not been read for a while in advance. Imagine if a network would also have this system implemented for a good while, like a year, to then retroactively show this information on all links. I wonder what it would look like...

Re: Twitter to label deepfakes and other deceptive media

#50

Post by bilekas »

pferde wrote: post #42
45ure wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fake- ness is even more effective, if the said candidate is the originator and controls the narrative.

If a person makes up a quote and distributes it with their own picture, is it really a made-up quote, is it "fake"? :)

"So proud to be the Man of the year 2020" - Me

Its fake, just because I said it, doesn't make the content true.

Post reply on HN