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

We’re underestimating the mind-warping potential of fake video

vox.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 108 posts

Re: We’re underestimating the mind-warping potential of fake video

#41

Post by ccvannorman »

thaumaturgy wrote: post #34
nawgszy wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems to me it's the mere fact that humanity's rise was borne on the back of its ruthless drive and selfish greed, and the same things that made us the best hunters also influence society in myriad ways. In my eyes, greed, hierarchy, and limited compassion / an inability to share are the filter, and all society's diseases are the symptoms.

I'm really disappointed when I hear this kind of thing. It's a sentiment that so many people believe, and want to believe, and choose to believe even in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. It's almost like a pernicious, psychological cancer, except it can also spread virulently to other susceptible hosts. Humanity's rise is due to lots of factors, especially the countless individuals who have worked to…

Hear, hear.

Yes, you can look back at our animal past and at Chimpanzees and say we're a brutal, greedy, what-ever. But that is only a tiny sliver of conscious existence. What makes us human is the constant progression towards humanity - compassion, love, and society-wide safety and abundance.

See Hans Rosling for some promising trends rooted in global facts over the past 100 years. Yes, there are still bad things "left over" from being animals, but these are declining over the decades ::across the board::

Re: We’re underestimating the mind-warping potential of fake video

#42

Post by roywiggins »

denimalpaca wrote: post #26

A good way to fight this is to cryptographically sign videos/audio. Might be a bit computationally expensive compared to a text message, but for very high-profile people, having a copy of the video/audio and it's cryptographic signature will be absolute proof against fakes. We don't even need AI algorithms to learn how to detect fakes in this case, it just becomes a matter of comparing hashes.

To an extent, it literally doesn't matter. If I fabricate a video and splash it around Facebook, it won't have a signature. Maybe Facebook will put a "has a signature" icon next to videos that are signed... but remind me, how much do web users notice when a website is HTTP vs HTTPS? Anyway, if a video is fully fabricated, there will be no hash to compare it with. And, by the time anyone does, it will already have been remixed and spread across Facebook.

There will be lots of good reasons for a video not to match bit-for-bit from CSPAN- if I add commentary on top of it, or intercut it with other clips Daily Show style, or just re-encode it, the hashes won't match. False positives are the death of an indicator, and there will be far too many of those for this sort of scheme to work.

Re: We’re underestimating the mind-warping potential of fake video

#43

Post by rabidrat »

makomk wrote: post #39
ethbro wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Vox article is also making a nuanced point -- that memory is constructed subconsciously. So the insidious thing? Creating 100 videos with only slight political position adjustments, and thereby (even if the videos are later revealed as fakes!) shifting a voter's "gut" impression of a candidate. I'd be amazed if we don't start seeing audio & video cryptographic authentication in the next 10 years. The subject of a…

This is probably already happening with good old fashioned Photoshop (or not even that sometimes). For instance, when a Telegraph journalist mistook a photoshopped photo of Trump with a white supremacist for the real deal and tweeted it with the comment that "this isn't complicated"[1], I doubt many people who saw the original tweet even saw the correction[2]. Over 28,000 retweets for the original claim, under a thou…

"A lie travels around the globe while the truth is putting on its shoes."

Re: We’re underestimating the mind-warping potential of fake video

#44

Post by sixothree »

munk-a wrote: post #29
denimalpaca wrote: post #26

A good way to fight this is to cryptographically sign videos/audio. Might be a bit computationally expensive compared to a text message, but for very high-profile people, having a copy of the video/audio and it's cryptographic signature will be absolute proof against fakes. We don't even need AI algorithms to learn how to detect fakes in this case, it just becomes a matter of comparing hashes.

When there is a binary on the internets available from various mirrors with the primary authority on it distributing a SHA of it's contents then we can use that SHA to verify the contents of the binary... The issue here is that there is no trusted authority on the video, the people distributing the video are the content originators so we can use a signature to verify the video wasn't corrupted in transmission but not…

Wouldn't the authority have to be the device manufacturers?

Re: We’re underestimating the mind-warping potential of fake video

#45

Post by munk-a »

sixothree wrote: post #44
munk-a wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When there is a binary on the internets available from various mirrors with the primary authority on it distributing a SHA of it's contents then we can use that SHA to verify the contents of the binary... The issue here is that there is no trusted authority on the video, the people distributing the video are the content originators so we can use a signature to verify the video wasn't corrupted in transmission but not…

Wouldn't the authority have to be the device manufacturers?

How would they technically accomplish this? Whenever a camcorder or phone or webcam was used would the hash be transmitted to the manufacturer and registered there? Would the device sign the video signature with some secret key? (similar to that big secret number you're not allowed to show)

Assuming you got it to work sanely, how would you ensure that all manufacturers properly locked down their devices?

Assuming there's a reasonable trust framework and you're able to enforce it... How would you allow legitimate video editing without allowing people to edit video to create misleading images? How would a movie cut between characters and an exploding model in a legitimate and signed manner without allowing someone to splice a politician's speech in with terrorist training videos?

There is a lot wrong with this "Tech can fix it" approach.

Re: We’re underestimating the mind-warping potential of fake video

#46

Post by meowface »

thaumaturgy wrote: post #34
nawgszy wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems to me it's the mere fact that humanity's rise was borne on the back of its ruthless drive and selfish greed, and the same things that made us the best hunters also influence society in myriad ways. In my eyes, greed, hierarchy, and limited compassion / an inability to share are the filter, and all society's diseases are the symptoms.

I'm really disappointed when I hear this kind of thing. It's a sentiment that so many people believe, and want to believe, and choose to believe even in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. It's almost like a pernicious, psychological cancer, except it can also spread virulently to other susceptible hosts. Humanity's rise is due to lots of factors, especially the countless individuals who have worked to…

You're right, but the problem is it it only takes a very small number of excessively greedy and power-hungry people to make the world worse for everyone.

Re: We’re underestimating the mind-warping potential of fake video

#47

Post by xamuel »

denimalpaca wrote: post #26

A good way to fight this is to cryptographically sign videos/audio. Might be a bit computationally expensive compared to a text message, but for very high-profile people, having a copy of the video/audio and it's cryptographic signature will be absolute proof against fakes. We don't even need AI algorithms to learn how to detect fakes in this case, it just becomes a matter of comparing hashes.

This would only hinder amateurs. Pros will just intercept the camera's own sensors. (A simple version of which can be done by amateurs: take a certified video of an uncertified video.) Maybe you could build GPS into the signature, which could help (I'm not sure how hard it would be to feed a camera fake GPS). But even if all these tech solutions work 100% perfectly, all you've done is weeded out laymen. The REAL powers (such as governments or multinational corporations) will just make backdoor deals with certificate authorities.

Re: We’re underestimating the mind-warping potential of fake video

#48

Post by xamuel »

KaoruAoiShiho wrote: post #6

Everyone's talking about fake news but I'm just excited for the potential of democratizing movie making.

Or reviving dead actors/celebrities. New John Wayne films, new early-Beatles performances. Or personalized films: insert your own family into (insert family-friendly classic film). I hope we don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Re: We’re underestimating the mind-warping potential of fake video

#49

Post by douglaswlance »

ryandvm wrote: post #17

I find it amusing that we're worried about the potential of fake video/audio. Like everything would be just be fine if it weren't for that possibility. Deep fakes haven't really shown up in the wild as a significant threat and we already have large swaths of society that can't agree on the truth. Certainly fake media isn't going to help any, but folks, we're ALREADY fucked.

If only we had some kind of decentralized consensus system that could help us formulate truth on a societal scale...

Re: We’re underestimating the mind-warping potential of fake video

#50

Post by Felz »

ZeroBugBounce wrote: post #24
ryandvm wrote: post #17

I find it amusing that we're worried about the potential of fake video/audio. Like everything would be just be fine if it weren't for that possibility. Deep fakes haven't really shown up in the wild as a significant threat and we already have large swaths of society that can't agree on the truth. Certainly fake media isn't going to help any, but folks, we're ALREADY fucked.

So is not agreeing on facts/truth The Great Filter?

Hm, I'd say not agreeing on facts/truth is more of a byproduct of not agreeing on what we want.

As a civilization, we still have the fatal problem that people want what's best for themselves, and we don't have great ways of making them work towards a common good. Worse still, as issues become more complex there are more ways to twist policy towards self-interest while maintaining a facade of group-interest. Evolution has beautifully primed us to do this subconsciously.

In this model, peoples' differing self interests leads to them constructing plausible but different arguments over "facts/truth". The conflict resolution mechanisms (argument) that used to work start breaking down. Society polarizes, stops agreeing on things, and eventually reverts to violence.

I don't think this is The Great Filter though. More likely our civilization disintegrates until it reaches a level of complexity we can handle again, but it's not going to be totally wiped out.

Post reply on HN