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

What Happens When AI-Generated Lies Are More Compelling Than the Truth?

behavioralscientist.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 111 posts

Re: What Happens When AI-Generated Lies Are More Compelling Than the Truth?

#51

Post by keiferski »

Can someone tell me why this idea isn’t workable and wouldn’t solve most deepfake issues?

All camera and phone manufacturers embed a code in each photo / video they produce.

All social media channels prioritize content that has these codes, and either block or de-prioritize content without them.

Result: the internet is filled with a vast amount of AI generated nonsense, but it’s mostly not treated as anything but entertainment. Any real content can be traced back to physical cameras.

The main issue I see is if the validation code is hacked at the camera level. But that is at least as preventable as say, preventing printers from counterfeiting money.

Re: What Happens When AI-Generated Lies Are More Compelling Than the Truth?

#53

Post by j-bos »

RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote: post #34
HPsquared wrote: post #2

There was a brief window where photography and videos became widespread so events could be documented and evidenced. Generative AI is drawing that period to an end, and we're returning to "who said / posted this" and having to trust the source rather than the image/message itself. It's a big regression.

Remember the fairy photo hoax that fooled Lewis Carrol? There was never a time when authenticated photo and video could be trusted without knowing the source and circumstances.

It fooled Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, a motivated believer, not Lewis Carrol. People will believe what they want. Trust is the fundamental issue.

Re: What Happens When AI-Generated Lies Are More Compelling Than the Truth?

#54

Post by perching_aix »

neepi wrote: post #27
HPsquared wrote: post #2

There was a brief window where photography and videos became widespread so events could be documented and evidenced. Generative AI is drawing that period to an end, and we're returning to "who said / posted this" and having to trust the source rather than the image/message itself. It's a big regression.

I await cryptographically signed photos coming out of cameras. Actually I’ve said that should be the case for the last 20 years. You should be able to follow a chain of evidence towards an unprocessed raw image potentially.

Unfortunately that doesn't prove too much. It all hinges on the cameras, which are just computers, operating in a verifiable fashion. Which they don't, as no consumer available computer currently does, and I don't see this changing in the near future, both for technological and political reasons.

I put a lot of effort into thinking about what could be proper trustable on photos and videos [0], but short of performing continuous modulation on the light sources the light of which is eventually captured by the cameras' sensors, there's no other way, and even that I'm not sure how would work with light actually doing the things its supposed to (reflection, refraction, scatter, polarization, etc.). And that's not even mentioning how the primary light source everyone understandably relies on, the Sun, will never emit such a modulated signal.

So what will happen instead I'm sure, is people deciding that they should not let perfection be the enemy of good, and moving on with this stuff anyways. Except this decision will not result in the necessary corresponding disclaimers reaching consumers, and so will begin the age of sham proofs and sham disprovals, and further radicalization. Here's to hope I'm wrong, and that these efforts will receive appropriate disclaimers when implemented and rolled out.

[0] related in a perhaps unexpected way: https://youtube.com/shorts/u-h5fHOcS88

Re: What Happens When AI-Generated Lies Are More Compelling Than the Truth?

#55

Post by JimDabell »

Vilian wrote: post #5
HPsquared wrote: post #2

There was a brief window where photography and videos became widespread so events could be documented and evidenced. Generative AI is drawing that period to an end, and we're returning to "who said / posted this" and having to trust the source rather than the image/message itself. It's a big regression.

Would be very interesting to require generative AI companies to log their created images for that purpose, it isn't gonna eliminate self hosted alternative, but it can destroy any fake evidence faster

This rules out any form of self-hosted generative AI. It’s not going to work. It needs to be the other way around; we need to prove authenticity.

Re: What Happens When AI-Generated Lies Are More Compelling Than the Truth?

#56

Post by Ukv »

ToucanLoucan wrote: post #3

> The concern is valid. But there’s a deeper worry, one that involves the enlargement not of our gullibility but of our cynicism. OpenAI CEO Sam Altman has voiced worries about the use of AI to influence elections, but he says the threat will go away once “everyone gets used to it.” > Some experts believe the opposite is true: The risks will grow as we acclimate ourselves to the presence of deepfakes. Once we take th…

> It is journalistic malpractice that these viewpoints are presented as [...]

Seems fine to me when it's explicitly stated to be the viewpoint of the OpenAI CEO, and then countered by an expert opinion. It's already apparent that MRDA[0].

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Well_he_would,_wouldn%27t_he%3...

Re: What Happens When AI-Generated Lies Are More Compelling Than the Truth?

#58

Post by lnrd »

keiferski wrote: post #51

Can someone tell me why this idea isn’t workable and wouldn’t solve most deepfake issues? All camera and phone manufacturers embed a code in each photo / video they produce. All social media channels prioritize content that has these codes, and either block or de-prioritize content without them. Result: the internet is filled with a vast amount of AI generated nonsense, but it’s mostly not treated as anything but ent…

So all I would have to do to make a "legitimate" fake picture is to generate it, print it, take a signed picture of the print with a camera and then upload it on the web?

With the right setup I could probably just take a picture of the screen directly, making it even easier (and enabling it for videos too).

Re: What Happens When AI-Generated Lies Are More Compelling Than the Truth?

#59

Post by IanCal »

> OpenAI CEO Sam Altman has voiced worries about the use of AI to influence elections, but he says the threat will go away once “everyone gets used to it.”

Then he's lying or a complete moron.

People have been able to fake things for ages, since you can entirely fabricate any text because you can just type it. The same as you can pass on any rumour by speaking it.

People are fundamentally aware of this. Nobody is confused about whether or not you can make up "X said Y".

*AND YET* people fall for this stuff all the time. Humans are bad at this and the ways in which we are bad at this is extensively documented.

The idea that once you can very quickly and cheaply generate fake images that somehow people will treat it with drastically more scepticism than text or talking is insane.

Frankly the side I see more likely is what's in the article - that just as real reporting is dismissed as fake news that legitimate images will be decried as AI if they don't fit someones narrative. It's a super easy get-out clause mentally. We see this now with people commenting about how someone elses comment simply cannot be from a real person because they used the word "delve", or structured things, or had an em dash. Hank Green has a video I can't find now where people looked at a space X explosion and said it was fake and AI and CGI, because it was filmed well with a drone - so it looks just like fake content.

Re: What Happens When AI-Generated Lies Are More Compelling Than the Truth?

#60

Post by _Algernon_ »

keiferski wrote: post #51

Can someone tell me why this idea isn’t workable and wouldn’t solve most deepfake issues? All camera and phone manufacturers embed a code in each photo / video they produce. All social media channels prioritize content that has these codes, and either block or de-prioritize content without them. Result: the internet is filled with a vast amount of AI generated nonsense, but it’s mostly not treated as anything but ent…

For one it puts a lot of trust into those corporations which they have not earned. Corporations exist to maximize profit. They already sell advertisement to foreign hostile actors. Why wouldn't they do the same with these types of codes for enough payment?

Also it gives them a lot of power to frame anyone for anything. How do you defend yourself against a cryptographic framed "proof" that ties you to a crime? At least when no evidence is trustworthy, the courts have to take this possibility into account. That's not the case when it's only used in rare cases.

Post reply on HN