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

AI-Generated Voice Evidence Poses Dangers in Court

lawfaremedia.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 171 posts

Re: AI-Generated Voice Evidence Poses Dangers in Court

#141

Post by pixl97 »

NoMoreNicksLeft wrote: post #49
treetalker wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To the contrary, in US courts the jury determines whether evidence (documentary, testimonial) is credible or not, and what weight (if any) to assign it. (Experts, à la Daubert etc., are a different matter because they give expert opinions, not factual evidence based on personal witnessing of the events in the case, so the judge does perform a gatekeeping function, essentially to ensure the underlying field/science is…

>While certainly Fox News headlines would not reach the jury in most instances, that is on account of hearsay, Nor should obviously fake evidence reach the jury. They can judge for themselves whether testimony is credible, but this is far different than admitting faked evidence. And if you can't see the difference, I'm not sure I'm qualified to explain it to you.

Exactly how is one supposed to determine what evidence is faked versus what evidence is not? Especially in the case where high technology has been used to mask that it is a fake?

Re: AI-Generated Voice Evidence Poses Dangers in Court

#143

Post by kenjackson »

fhd2 wrote: post #2

Sounds like reasonable changes. Generally speaking, I think evidence tampering is not a new problem, and even though it's easy in some cases, I don't think it's _that_ widespread. Just like it's possible to lie on the stand, but people usually think twice before they do it, because _if_ they are found to have lied, they're in trouble. My main concern is rather that legit evidence can now easily be called into questio…

> I don't think it's _that_ widespread. Just like it's possible to lie on the stand, but people usually think twice before they do it, because _if_ they are found to have lied, they're in trouble.

I don't have data, but I suspect a LOT of people lie on the stand. This is mostly based on what I see on reality court shows and true crime type shows, so admittedly not a great sample, but I figure once something gets to trial things are going to be contentious.

Re: AI-Generated Voice Evidence Poses Dangers in Court

#144

Post by michaelbuckbee »

WalterBright wrote: post #142

Add to that AI generated photographs and video. BTW, I've always wondered about the validity of email evidence. Email is text on a computer. You can edit it to say whatever you want.

I'm aware of using DKIM signing records to prove that certain emails were actually sent through systems at certain times as there are headers that change based on them in the actual emails.

Note: pretty sure I got the concept right and misused a few terms here.

Re: AI-Generated Voice Evidence Poses Dangers in Court

#145

Post by A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 »

WalterBright wrote: post #142

Add to that AI generated photographs and video. BTW, I've always wondered about the validity of email evidence. Email is text on a computer. You can edit it to say whatever you want.

It is true in a very general kind of way, but we no longer live in a world when one admin controls every aspect of company's IT ( with maybe exception of small mom and pop shops ). As a result, default controls in place have gotten a little more granular ( and annoying ). All that said, the evidence by itself is not as useful as the hired expert, who explains what the evidence is, how we know it is good and so on.

Re: AI-Generated Voice Evidence Poses Dangers in Court

#146

Post by mholt »

WalterBright wrote: post #142

Add to that AI generated photographs and video. BTW, I've always wondered about the validity of email evidence. Email is text on a computer. You can edit it to say whatever you want.

In a lawsuit in the early 2000s where my family member was the defendant, the plaintiff had forged emails. In the end, my family member won the lawsuit, so whatever they did, worked! I wish I could remember the details. I will have to go back and ask them how they did it.

Re: AI-Generated Voice Evidence Poses Dangers in Court

#147

Post by kragen »

WalterBright wrote: post #142

Add to that AI generated photographs and video. BTW, I've always wondered about the validity of email evidence. Email is text on a computer. You can edit it to say whatever you want.

You may be interested the decision in the COPA vs. Wright case https://www.judiciary.uk/judgments/copa-v-wright/ where Craig Wright falsely claimed to be Satoshi Nakamoto and forged many kinds of text on computers in order to support his baseless claims, including emails. The COPA's experts, among others, found lots of cases where he slipped up, and the court's decision and its appendix go into a great deal of detail about how those slipups were detected.

Re: AI-Generated Voice Evidence Poses Dangers in Court

#148

Post by kragen »

mholt wrote: post #146
WalterBright wrote: post #142

Add to that AI generated photographs and video. BTW, I've always wondered about the validity of email evidence. Email is text on a computer. You can edit it to say whatever you want.

In a lawsuit in the early 2000s where my family member was the defendant, the plaintiff had forged emails. In the end, my family member won the lawsuit, so whatever they did, worked! I wish I could remember the details. I will have to go back and ask them how they did it.

I'm interested to see whether they attempted to show that the email was forged. Are the filings in the case a matter of public record? Usually they are in countries like the US and UK.

Re: AI-Generated Voice Evidence Poses Dangers in Court

#149

Post by EGreg »

consteval wrote: post #134
throwway120385 wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The nuance that's usually missing is that new technology invariably enables the same things but more of them and faster.

Everyone misses this all the time. Most problems can be overlooked because they’re not that prolific. There’s a chain of events that really hinges on that assumption. For example, piracy is really not a problem. In fact I’m pro-piracy most of the time. But if everyone could pirate with no thought and no down time, I don’t think our economy will survive. Just because something is okay in small doses doesn’t mean it sc…

Do you think the people who keep commenting "X was always a problem" are really unaware of this? Or they are just trying to dampen any alarm on purpose?

Re: AI-Generated Voice Evidence Poses Dangers in Court

#150

Post by dartos »

ykonstant wrote: post #136
dartos wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think forensic analysis of photographs would reveal pretty quickly if they’re AI anyway. AI images of real life still don’t pass intense scrutiny.

Right... forensics, the famously reliable discipline.

You can entirely remove the word “forensics” and my statement would be the same…
Post reply on HN