51–60 of 181 posts
It's fascinating to me that all the information required for the analysis is publicly available. This seems like a big shift from an era when only an intelligence agency would have been able to perform this sort of analysis.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It all started with a tip that gave them the general area though. This is my favorite example of gathering data just from examining a video: https://www.bellingcat.com/resources/case-studies/2014/08/22...
>It all started with a tip that gave them the general area though. So, good old fashioned journalism?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Does it really matter? That's not the way to deal with even the most vicious of criminals, let alone his child.
Yes it does matter. Tremendously. For example is this soldiers initiative or part of a general tactics encouraged by the higher command? Was the execution justified (i.e. motivated, that is, it was not a cover up or a random killing)? I can come up with few reasons to kill the woman but why the child? Is there some message behind this killing? Naturally these questions do not matter for despising such behaviour but a…
I always believe that understanding is important. There are those who think "Understanding==Condoning", which I find a tremendously, and needlessly, false equivalency. I think you need to understand, to trully fight and hopefully defeat something.
How far does the atrocity go? What are the causes? Is this a one-of or repeated act? Who all is involved? And, ultimately, What are the inflection points that can lead to effective prevention?
On the other hand, this seems to be...below...the BBC:
"The government statement makes clear that all these men enjoy the presumption of innocence, and that they will be given a fair trial."
"The two women killed outside Zelevet received no trial at all.
"No presumption of innocence was extended to the children who died with them."
It's fascinating to me that all the information required for the analysis is publicly available. This seems like a big shift from an era when only an intelligence agency would have been able to perform this sort of analysis.
Fascinating indeed. However, the main question remained unanswered (and unasked). Who ordered the killings?
Incredible bit of analysis and presentation. It's hard to watch this sort of footage for me now. Once upon a time when I was younger I could handle it, but with young children the same sort of age it really tears me apart. Though, I think people should be forced to confront it, because it's the only way it's ever going to improve.
A brilliant piece of work to place the location. On the other hand, this seems to be...below...the BBC: " The government statement makes clear that all these men enjoy the presumption of innocence, and that they will be given a fair trial. " " The two women killed outside Zelevet received no trial at all. " No presumption of innocence was extended to the children who died with them. "
A brilliant piece of work to place the location. On the other hand, this seems to be...below...the BBC: " The government statement makes clear that all these men enjoy the presumption of innocence, and that they will be given a fair trial. " " The two women killed outside Zelevet received no trial at all. " No presumption of innocence was extended to the children who died with them. "
The BBC could have worded its closing tweet more clearly, but I don't think it's wrong for them to reiterate how rich it is for the Cameroonian gov't to make promises of fair trials when it seems to have done its damndest to avoid bringing justice at all.
It's fascinating to me that all the information required for the analysis is publicly available. This seems like a big shift from an era when only an intelligence agency would have been able to perform this sort of analysis.
The "open source intelligence" report on the MH17 incident -- where people found social media videos of the Buk missile proceeding through the countryside before being used to down the passenger jet -- was super interesting in a similar vein: https://www.bellingcat.com/news/uk-and-europe/2015/10/08/mh1...
You can find a lot of individuals and small orgs on Twitter doing stuff like spotting military ships and their cargo, spotting drones on satellite imagery, collecting lists of destroyed heavy weapons, listing ATGM attacks, airstrike victims (airwars.com), geolocating videos/pictures posted to social media, colleting info on chemical attacks (bellingcat), collecting and publishing ISIS documents online, recreating 3D models of some events from public videos/photos, etc.
One example of 3D modelling (they call it forensic architecutre) based on open source data is in this report on Douma attack:
https://www.nytimes.com/video/world/middleeast/1000000058408...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I disagree that "deepfakes" will be unverifiable. There is very robust forensic framework for analyzing videos for authenticity, and it often relies not just on the visual component but all the other vectors that open up as a result-EM waves being generated, audio analysis, etc. A deepfake that passes this analytical function would imply that we will not be seeing advancements in digital forensics due to AI, which do…
If there is a program which output the authenticity of input, Can't we use that to further improve the NN? Eventually, given enough computation, trained NN reliably output videos even the said program can't bust. I see a dark future ahead of us.