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

Zelensky video deepfake

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 308 posts

Re: Zelensky video deepfake

#201

Post by aurizon »

afavour wrote: post #63
crate_barre wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Information dissemination must be similar to fluid dynamics. It just has to be. It’s simpler and more insidious than that. I’ll use the old Eleanor Roosevelt quote: "Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people." Most people are not that intellectual and probably spent most of their life gossiping. They wouldn’t know how to even discuss certain topics if the low hanging fruit of…

> I’ll use the old Eleanor Roosevelt quote The quote seems appropriate for a person that doesn’t want to be talked about. I get what it’s going for but “only small minds talk about people” feels like it serves political elites very well. Don’t talk about me and my conduct. Talk about the generalised idea of conduct by people who are somewhat like me! I studied politics at university and learned enough about political…

Eleanor Roosevelt was instrumental in blocking the forced repatriation of large numbers of displaced persons to their various home countries that were in the USSR after WW2. A large number of these displaced persons were from the Ukraine(detailed numbers not known) and even though there was a huge effort by the USSR to get these people back, these largely failed and many countries settled them and gave them landed immigrant status. Exceptions were made for war criminals, who also tried to hide. Of those sent to the USSR, many were imprisoned/killed etc. Apologies for political stuff, but the spots on the leopard remain. (nothing against the beautiful leopards either)

http://www.dpcamps.org/repatriation3.html

Re: Zelensky video deepfake

#202

Post by PaulDavisThe1st »

reaperducer wrote: post #193
jonnycomputer wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Living in rural America, where it is safe, and folks are polite and friendly and happy to leave you alone (if you're white), I have to say that doesn't mean people don't believe batsht crazy things. Because lots of them do. Or at least say they do, 'cause there is a big step between saying you believe something and actually acting like you do.

Believing batshit crazy things isn't unique to rural areas. In fact, I'd say it's more common in cities simply because there are more people there. I know a woman who lives in Chicago who doesn't believe in dinosaurs. It's not a religious thing, it's just that dinosaurs don't fit into her mindset somehow. I dated a woman in New York (native New Yorker) whose entire family believed that the moon landings were fake. I…

Crazy is indeed everywhere. And when it is individual crazy, it likely doesn't matter much (and might even be helpful).

However, organized, coordinated crazy is a problem, even more so when it is sufficiently organized and coordinated to become an effective player in our political system.

Re: Zelensky video deepfake

#203

Post by gureddio »

mufufu wrote: post #65
mmaunder wrote: post #20

The quality on this is really awful. Lighting mismatch on the neck, no atmospheric effects, voice sounds robotic, very little movement and it’s unnatural. It’s not even a useful PoC. It’s more like a meme. I think if it actually got some traction in mainstream media - like Marina Ovsyannikova’s fake Twitter account which was quoted by journos, then you could call it a legitimate first.

I don’t know, honestly I felt the opposite way, maybe because I’m not Ukrainian and it’s not my native language. But I found the level of deep fake we can achieve nowadays truly scary. Even if it was a shoddy job, I feel like that’s enough to convince a lot of people, or at least stir confusion

I think the promise is there... but when I come across a deepfake right now, they often don't seem convincing to me. This one included

Re: Zelensky video deepfake

#204

Post by sailingparrot »

root_axis wrote: post #140
snek_case wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's true for now, but eventually, as the technology progresses, it will take very little training data to create deepfakes of anyone unfortunately. Probably just a minute or two of video.

Is this true? I don't see much evidence that the technology is progressing in a direction where models will require less training data, if anything the trend seems to be towards models with higher and higher parameter counts.

It's somewhat true.

Better models are coming out which are already pretrained on a significant amount of data, so the model already learned a lot about what is common to all example of video generation (keeping the edges aligned coherently at every frame, keeping texture and lighting coherent etc.) and will not need to re-learn that for every target.

Since initially, deepfake models were trained from scratch for every single target, you had to provide a lot of data from the person you want to target so that the model can learn what is common as well as what is specific.

Now you can get descent performance with much less data, since you only need to learn the specifities.

However, this only helps if you need a limited deepfake: The model cannot infer the exact facial expression of the target when they are, for example, laughing unless you provided an example of that in the training data (assuming there is no way to infer the laughing expression from someone by looking at other provided expressions). It will instead generate a generic laugh. All missing informations are substituted by what was seen, on average, in the pre-training phase.

That wouldn't work for a long complex deepfake meant to be sent to someone reasonably close with the target.

But for the types of deepfake where it's targeting a personality that we all know, but not very well at all, much less data is neeeded than before for a similar result.

Re: Zelensky video deepfake

#205

Post by RobertMiller »

zelphirkalt wrote: post #111

The idea could also be to first post something obviously fake, in order to make everyone think, that their deep fake video tech is not addvanced enough to create really good fakes. Later they post something, where they put in maximum effort to make it seem real, having people think back to the previous fake and think: "Oh but this looks real and they are not able to produce better deep fakes than that other video."

The general class of 'They're pretending to be incompetent... as a trick!' theories about Russia all seem less likely by the day.

Re: Zelensky video deepfake

#206

Post by Tomte »

gerikson wrote: post #50

In Swedish telephone directories there used to be a section entitled "Om kriget kommer" (If there's war). Prominent among it was the phrase: > Varje meddelande att motsåndet ska uppges är falskt. (Every message stating that resistance has ceased is false). No doubt something similar is stated in Ukraine. https://www.forsvarsmakten.se/siteassets/5-information-och-f...

Out of curiosity: with very limited knowledge of the language I would have translated "ska" as "will" or probably better "should" (in the sense of "if someone tells you you should give up resisting, it's false").

Is this a usage of ska I haven't learned?

Re: Zelensky video deepfake

#207

Post by mikey_p »

hprotagonist wrote: post #67

It’s always a bit of a shock to remember that “photographs lie!” goes back to the very beginning of photography. See this (probably) staged war photograph from 1855 — in Crimea, of all ironic places: https://petapixel.com/2012/10/01/famous-valley-of-the-shadow...

To be completely fair, we don't know that it was staged just for the photograph. We don't know who moved the cannonballs, or why they moved them. All we know is that there are two photographs, and that the one without the cannonballs on the road came first.

Re: Zelensky video deepfake

#208

Post by paganel »

jhugo wrote: post #184
paganel wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How come in Romania (from where I'm from) it is illegal to have a street named after Antonescu (our Bandera counter-part from WW2) while in neighbouring Ukraine it is not? Why aren't they 100% for eliminating their Nazi past from, well, the present?

That law does indeed exist, but nonetheless you still have numerous streets in Romania named after Antonescu. They can be trivially found on Google Maps. For example, Strada Mareșal Ion Antonescu in Constanța [0] — and it was given that name in 2000! Of course, nobody should judge all Romanians, nor even the political leaders who were not directly involved in the naming decision, for that. Countries are not a homogen…

It's a small street that no-one has heard about, this is a boulevard in the capital city. We had the same thing in Bucharest, when there was a church (built by Antonescu and his wife) that had a bust sculpture [1] of him in the church-yard sometime in the early 2000s. There was of course a huge scandal, with the foreign ambassadors chiming in, the law against naming things after bad people from our history got passed soon after so that we could entry into the EU, so of course that the bust sculpture had to go.

> Countries are not a homogenous unit.

I expect things that stand in your face (like a boulevard in a capital city, a bust sculpture of a genocide perpetrator in a downtown place in another capital city) to not be left to the local authorities. Even Bandera's wiki page mentions the EU and Israeli administrations not being at all happy with Ukraine naming things after Bandera back in ~2011, apparently that has all been forgotten now that Putin has attacked and everyone acts surprised how come Putin calls the Ukrainians as being nazis. And I didn't mention anything about the infamous "Freikorps" now battling the Russians close to Sumy, most definitely their name was not taken from a Heine poem or anything like that.

[1] https://foto.agerpres.ro/foto/detaliu/158701 (if you're Romanian you might recognise one of the characters in that photo)

Re: Zelensky video deepfake

#209

Post by hnuser847 »

jonnycomputer wrote: post #126
caffeine wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you tried living in any liberal part of the country? People there don’t just think they should dictate what you do , but also what you think!

I think that is generally true everywhere. People are against censorship, except when they're for it. They're for religious freedom, except for "those people". They're for free speech, except when you say things they don't like. I've not seen one group that values their own speech, their own beliefs, their own values, actions and communities, that doesn't undervalue the speech, beliefs, values and communities of othe…

This is the hard truth that has taken me many years to accept. When it comes to politics, moral principles are for other people to follow. Lies, hypocrisy, doublethink, violence, etc. are all fair game if they advance the interests of your own group. I don't think there's a solution for this. It just is what it is.

Re: Zelensky video deepfake

#210

Post by saalweachter »

InitialLastName wrote: post #186
spywaregorilla wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The right wing political machine made Hillary Clinton out to be the devil. They, correctly, anticipated her run for president after Obama, and spent years making her out to be the worst person in America before she even began campaigning. The result is many conservative circles are still obsessed with her even though she is relatively unimportant.

That demonizing started way before the 2016 lead-up; until Obama came into the foreground she was also a clear front-runner for the 2008 election, so the machine was targeting her even then. I've noted this before, but being in the public eye for too long tends to be really bad news for presidential hopefuls in the US (Biden being the exception that proves the rule in that he eked out a win against a wildly unpopular…

She's the woman an entire generation of men was raised to hate, starting with Bill Clinton's first presidential run and Rush Limbaugh.
Post reply on HN