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

People are trying to claim real videos are deepfakes

text.npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 200 posts

Re: People are trying to claim real videos are deepfakes

#31

Post by TeMPOraL »

noughtme wrote: post #22
ccvannorman wrote: post #5

"Tesla lawyers argue Musk cannot be held accountable for public statements [about car safety] because anyone could have made a deepfake of Musk, so no public statements can be taken seriously." Court laughs.

This doesn’t seem unreasonable. Isn’t this already the case for politicians in the US? (Not related to deepfakes, just any public statement). Wouldn’t any legal matters defer to written contracts and TOS?

Indeed. Given the current state of affairs, I think if anyone were to be a victim of a deepfake smear campaing, Musk is easily in top 10 of the most likely candidates.

Re: People are trying to claim real videos are deepfakes

#32

Post by taylodl »

noughtme wrote: post #22
ccvannorman wrote: post #5

"Tesla lawyers argue Musk cannot be held accountable for public statements [about car safety] because anyone could have made a deepfake of Musk, so no public statements can be taken seriously." Court laughs.

This doesn’t seem unreasonable. Isn’t this already the case for politicians in the US? (Not related to deepfakes, just any public statement). Wouldn’t any legal matters defer to written contracts and TOS?

It's very unreasonable when the actual person makes the actual statement. You know how people keep saying contracts aren't worth the paper they're written on? You know what's one of the things making your contract and TOS practically worthless? Your public statements.

What you say matters. A lot.

Re: People are trying to claim real videos are deepfakes

#33

Post by moffkalast »

e_i_pi_2 wrote: post #14
xur17 wrote: post #3

I thought this part was particularly interesting: > "Their position is that because Mr. Musk is famous and might be more of a target for deep fakes, his public statements are immune," she wrote. "In other words, Mr. Musk, and others in his position, can simply say whatever they like in the public domain, then hide behind the potential for their recorded statements being a deep fake to avoid taking ownership of what t…

This seems like the main point - it's not that court won't accept a deepfake defense, but you would have to prove that it was faked, just like any other convincing evidence

Doesn't this also mean that a deepfake presented as evidence of crime makes you guilty until proven innocent?

Re: People are trying to claim real videos are deepfakes

#34

Post by pcthrowaway »

e_i_pi_2 wrote: post #14
xur17 wrote: post #3

I thought this part was particularly interesting: > "Their position is that because Mr. Musk is famous and might be more of a target for deep fakes, his public statements are immune," she wrote. "In other words, Mr. Musk, and others in his position, can simply say whatever they like in the public domain, then hide behind the potential for their recorded statements being a deep fake to avoid taking ownership of what t…

This seems like the main point - it's not that court won't accept a deepfake defense, but you would have to prove that it was faked, just like any other convincing evidence

But then the defense has to pay the cost of hiring an expert to prove it's not authentic.

It's really hard to predict where the technology is headed with regards to both generating and proving the non-authenticity of deepfakes, but it is concerning that this could open up people without money to pay for defense to be ruined by people with money to pay for deepfakes.

Re: People are trying to claim real videos are deepfakes

#35

Post by blondie9x »

cma wrote: post #30
splendidHaiku wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everything will be considered fake unless it is proven authentic. How do we prove authentic? Same way we prove that a website we visit is authentic. Every recording made will be signed/hashed and be able to validate of the public key of the recording device (every phone will have a key). White House, News Orgs, etc. all will use cameras with public keys so everyone can validate. As soon as only one pixel or frequency…

You could take a picture of a picture or a recording of a recording and now it is validated.

How would that relate to the hashing explained here?

Re: People are trying to claim real videos are deepfakes

#36

Post by taylodl »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #31
noughtme wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This doesn’t seem unreasonable. Isn’t this already the case for politicians in the US? (Not related to deepfakes, just any public statement). Wouldn’t any legal matters defer to written contracts and TOS?

Indeed. Given the current state of affairs, I think if anyone were to be a victim of a deepfake smear campaing, Musk is easily in top 10 of the most likely candidates.

Yes, there are downsides to being a dick and trolling the world and thinking it's funny. Who'da thunk it?

Re: People are trying to claim real videos are deepfakes

#37

Post by anonymouskimmer »

sigmoid10 wrote: post #13
d23 wrote: post #2

Any attorneys here that can discuss the nuances involved in knowingly lying to the court, which I believe carries penalties for the attorney? And why / whether that would or wouldn’t apply here?

Lying in court is not a crime. You need to be under oath to be able to commit perjury, e.g. by being a witness who is giving testimony which in turn will be used as evidence. Everyone else can lie as much as they want without fear of repercussions.

In the US, attorneys are officers of the court. They are forbidden from lying to the court at all times.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/officer_of_the_court

Re: People are trying to claim real videos are deepfakes

#38

Post by anonymouskimmer »

riskneutral wrote: post #9
d23 wrote: post #2

Any attorneys here that can discuss the nuances involved in knowingly lying to the court, which I believe carries penalties for the attorney? And why / whether that would or wouldn’t apply here?

I'm not a lawyer, but I'm pretty sure that's not a thing. Lying to the court is a routine part of litigation, and there is no penalty or sanction for it - especially not against the lawyers themselves.

In the US, attorneys are officers of the court. They are forbidden from lying to the court at all times.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/officer_of_the_court

Re: People are trying to claim real videos are deepfakes

#39

Post by Raidion »

cma wrote: post #30
splendidHaiku wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everything will be considered fake unless it is proven authentic. How do we prove authentic? Same way we prove that a website we visit is authentic. Every recording made will be signed/hashed and be able to validate of the public key of the recording device (every phone will have a key). White House, News Orgs, etc. all will use cameras with public keys so everyone can validate. As soon as only one pixel or frequency…

You could take a picture of a picture or a recording of a recording and now it is validated.

But it wouldn't be validated with the original key, so people could know it could have been tampered with.

Re: People are trying to claim real videos are deepfakes

#40

Post by SoftTalker »

PrimeMcFly wrote: post #18
RecycledEle wrote: post #15

I have had several of my dash cam videos thrown out because "judges" thought they were faked. Even when I uploaded the video to YouTube within 24 hours of the wreck the "judge" said I had years to fake it.

Couldn't you appeal and get expert testimony to verify the videos?

Depending on the case, the cost may have exceeded the damages at stake.
Post reply on HN