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

NeRF: An eventual successor for deepfakes?

metaphysic.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 169 posts

Re: NeRF: An eventual successor for deepfakes?

#101

Post by userabchn »

fxtentacle wrote: post #16
RubyRidgeRandy wrote: post #4

Something I've wondered lately is what will life be like in a post-truth society? we already see examples of this now where a large number of people get their news from fake memes on facebook. There are huge swathes of people who live in their own make-believe world, like those believing wholeheartedly that the 2020 election was stolen. What will life be like when you can't trust any video or interview you see becaus…

I believe we'll go back to trusting local experts that you can meet in person to confirm that they are not a bot. Because anything online will be known to be untrustworthy. Most blogs, chat groups and social media posts will be spam bots. And it'll be impossible for the average person to tell the difference between chatting with a bot and chatting with a human. But humans crave social connections and intimate physica…

I suspect that many chat groups (such as Facebook groups), even small niche ones, already have GPT-3-like bots posting messages that seem to fit into the group but that are trained to provide opinions on certain topics that align with the message that the organisation/country controlling them wishes to push, or to nudge conversations in that direction.

Re: NeRF: An eventual successor for deepfakes?

#102

Post by Zababa »

RubyRidgeRandy wrote: post #4

Something I've wondered lately is what will life be like in a post-truth society? we already see examples of this now where a large number of people get their news from fake memes on facebook. There are huge swathes of people who live in their own make-believe world, like those believing wholeheartedly that the 2020 election was stolen. What will life be like when you can't trust any video or interview you see becaus…

> What will life be like when you can't trust any video or interview you see because it could be completely fake?

I don't understand your point. This has been the case for a while. People were editing photos to remove people in the time of Stalin. And even before that, you can lie, write false records, destroy them.

Re: NeRF: An eventual successor for deepfakes?

#103

Post by formerkrogemp »

newswasboring wrote: post #19
fxtentacle wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe we'll go back to trusting local experts that you can meet in person to confirm that they are not a bot. Because anything online will be known to be untrustworthy. Most blogs, chat groups and social media posts will be spam bots. And it'll be impossible for the average person to tell the difference between chatting with a bot and chatting with a human. But humans crave social connections and intimate physica…

Your second paragraph is very intriguing. I never really thought about this. I wonder if people will actually be able to restrict usage though. Its software, and historically it has been hard to restrict it. Of course cloud based systems have two advantages, software is hidden behind the API and they have really powerful systems. But the former requires a single lapse in security to leak and latter just requires time…

I've heard this for years, but software will eventually face its own regulation and barriers to entry much as healthcare and accounting have theirs.

Re: NeRF: An eventual successor for deepfakes?

#104

Post by gernb »

RubyRidgeRandy wrote: post #4

Something I've wondered lately is what will life be like in a post-truth society? we already see examples of this now where a large number of people get their news from fake memes on facebook. There are huge swathes of people who live in their own make-believe world, like those believing wholeheartedly that the 2020 election was stolen. What will life be like when you can't trust any video or interview you see becaus…

I was listening to "This American Life" and they had a segment on someone who setup an site to give you a random number to call in Russia where you were supposed to give them info about what's happening in the Ukraine. It was someone shocking to hear their side of the story, that Russia is a hero for helping oppresed Russians in Ukraine.

But then I stepped back and wondered, I'm assuming that the story I've been told is also 100% correct. What proof do I have it is? I get my news from sources who've been wrong before or who have a record of reporting only the official line. My gut still tells me the story I'm being told in the west is correct, but still, the bigger picture is how do I know who to trust?

I see this all over the news. I think/assume the news I get about Ukraine in the west is correct but then I see so much spinning on every other topic that it's hard to know how much spinning is going on here too.

Re: NeRF: An eventual successor for deepfakes?

#105

Post by RobertRoberts »

gernb wrote: post #104
RubyRidgeRandy wrote: post #4

Something I've wondered lately is what will life be like in a post-truth society? we already see examples of this now where a large number of people get their news from fake memes on facebook. There are huge swathes of people who live in their own make-believe world, like those believing wholeheartedly that the 2020 election was stolen. What will life be like when you can't trust any video or interview you see becaus…

I was listening to "This American Life" and they had a segment on someone who setup an site to give you a random number to call in Russia where you were supposed to give them info about what's happening in the Ukraine. It was someone shocking to hear their side of the story, that Russia is a hero for helping oppresed Russians in Ukraine. But then I stepped back and wondered, I'm assuming that the story I've been told…

I was asked "What are we going to do about Ukraine!?" And I said, "It's a civil war that's been going on for almost 10 years, what is different now?" and their response was "what? I'd never heard that." And I added, "In 2014 there was an overthrow of an elected president there and it started the war." Blank stares.

I have a friend who traveled to Europe regularly for tech training, including Ukraine, and he was surprised about how little people know what is going because people's news sources are so limited. (mostly by choice I assume)

No special tech needed to manipulate people, just lack of multiple information sources?

Re: NeRF: An eventual successor for deepfakes?

#106

Post by dTal »

gadders wrote: post #63
RubyRidgeRandy wrote: post #4

Something I've wondered lately is what will life be like in a post-truth society? we already see examples of this now where a large number of people get their news from fake memes on facebook. There are huge swathes of people who live in their own make-believe world, like those believing wholeheartedly that the 2020 election was stolen. What will life be like when you can't trust any video or interview you see becaus…

>> There are huge swathes of people who live in their own make-believe world, like those believing wholeheartedly that the 2020 election was stolen There are also those that wholeheartedly believe Trump colluded with Russia to win the 2016 election, or that the Steele dossier was factual.

These are not equivalent. Russia did interfere, there were links between Trump and Russia, therefore there is circumstantial evidence that collusion occurred, sufficient to trigger a widely publicized investigation. The allegations of election fraud in 2020 however are 100% alternate universe yarns spun for political gain with no basis in fact whatsoever.

Re: NeRF: An eventual successor for deepfakes?

#107

Post by dTal »

intrasight wrote: post #76
wongarsu wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

80% of the problem could be solved with a reliable signature scheme that allows some remixing of video content. So if CNN publishes a video, signed with their key so it's verifiably CNN, we need the ability to take a 20 second bit of it and still have a valid key attached that verifies that the source is CNN (without trusting the editor). Then you can share clips, remix it, etc, and have integration in social media t…

My plan to solve this "20 second bit of it" is that it's done at the analog hole. Whatever is painting those pixels, a smart TV for instance, will be coordinating with cloud services to fingerprint at a relatively high temporal resolution - maybe 5 seconds. The video itself is the signature. But we will need either trusted analog hole vendors or some trusted non-profit organization - or likely both. I think that "vie…

I sincerely hope this dystopian vision of the future is satire, but it's already a worrying sign of the times that I'm not sure.

Re: NeRF: An eventual successor for deepfakes?

#108

Post by blamestross »

intrasight wrote: post #98
notfed wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If a video is already cryptographcally signed, then you can safely distribute the signature on an untrusted channel. Adding Blockchain into the mix is superfluous, and destroys scalability.

We don't watch signature keys - we watch videos. The TV will have to match every short segment - perhaps 5 seconds of video - against a blockchain which scores the validity of that segment - and of course looking back to it's original source. Signing the whole video is necessary but not sufficient. But yes, this is going to be resource-intensive.

> against a blockchain which scores the validity of that segment

Why not just allow a cert with that information to be delivered alongside the video? Where would the "score" come from?

Re: NeRF: An eventual successor for deepfakes?

#109

Post by cwkoss »

narrator wrote: post #64
RubyRidgeRandy wrote: post #4

Something I've wondered lately is what will life be like in a post-truth society? we already see examples of this now where a large number of people get their news from fake memes on facebook. There are huge swathes of people who live in their own make-believe world, like those believing wholeheartedly that the 2020 election was stolen. What will life be like when you can't trust any video or interview you see becaus…

Surprise Plot Twist: Maybe we're already living in a post-truth society and you are still sure you know what the truth is. How would you even know that what you were ferociously defending as the truth wasn't a lie? What makes you think you're not smart enough to not fall for lies? Largely, I think most people's means of finding the truth is just to take a vote of the information sources they find credible and go with…

Disinformation is very common in traditional news media. This technology just democratizes this tool and allows anyone to engage in it.

There will probably be a net increase in disinformation, but citizens will likely also get better at being skeptical of currently unquestioned modes of disinformation.

Re: NeRF: An eventual successor for deepfakes?

#110

Post by toss1 »

bee_rider wrote: post #74
toss1 wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And how many use or will use the tech, and how many of those will use it competently, and how many of those are competent to validate and know that their checking technology has not been compromised (e.g., hacking or distributing bad authenticity checkers and/or certs like hacking or distributing bad crypto-wallets)?

End-to-end encryption was a giant pain in the butt that required dinking around with PGP or whatever, but now it is a pretty mainstream feature for chat apps (once they figured out how to monetize despite it). Tech takes a while to trickle down to mainstream applications, but it'll get there if the problem becomes well known enough.

I agree that e2e encryption is becoming more widespread and "user friendly".

However, the friendliness seems inversely proportional with the ability of the users to detect that their tool is failing/corrupted/hacked/etc. So while we might have more widespread tools, we also have a more widespread ability to give a false sense of security.

Post reply on HN