71–80 of 110 posts
This statement is confusing me in many ways. Can anyone explain the exact logic behind it? Specifically, for “forced to do” and “lack of respect”.
How does it, and implications of it, seem for you?
I am disappointed in the level of fear-mongering pearl clutching; it could[0] get so much worse! First, the person creating the fakes is using an off-the-shelf algorithm[1], adapted accordingly. A system designed purely for the purpose of swapping faces (or morphing a particular face into others, one-to-many style) would obviously yield improvements. Secondly, it's the work of one person without commercial backing[2]…
> How about something more realistic, like character assassination campaigns? if fake porn does become ubiquitous as you argue, wouldn't the impact of such assassination be greatly diminished?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We've already seen this with images and Photoshop. Society and their heuristics of belief will adjust as these new capabilities become widespread. What's more troubling is that as media becomes falsifiable, solid evidence of...well, anything, becomes hard to have. The ultimate loser there is the truth, sadly.
Did you mean "less falsifiable"?
Not exactly a new concept but it’s likely extremely cheap now and would even get cheaper and better. With VR porn, the new sex toys for men and women and now this I’m somewhat happy that this wasn’t around when I was a teenager as I’m really not confident I would have left the room if that was available.
Contrary to the article's stance that this would be used to create fake revenge porn or celebrity sex tapes that are taken as real, I'd expect this to devalue the real thing and give space for people to claim anything with their face in it is fake.
We've already seen this with images and Photoshop. Society and their heuristics of belief will adjust as these new capabilities become widespread. What's more troubling is that as media becomes falsifiable, solid evidence of...well, anything, becomes hard to have. The ultimate loser there is the truth, sadly.
It wasn't the good old days or anything, but that was how it worked for a while. There will be value in being a trustworthy source of information again.
Have every public figure have their own key pair, and each official production have its own key pair. Then publish a signed hash or similar for each production the figure chooses to appear in. Any production without such a signature or with one that can't be verified is probably fake.
Would be a big shift in process, and would only happen if this sort of thing becomes a serious problem, but once it did such a scheme would stop it in its tracks.
While the objectification is bad, I think the issue of determining truth from lies should be solvable: public key cryptography seems simple enough. Have every public figure have their own key pair, and each official production have its own key pair. Then publish a signed hash or similar for each production the figure chooses to appear in. Any production without such a signature or with one that can't be verified is p…
Also — do you really need a signed signature to verify a celeb isn’t actually in a porn? It’s not like they’d sign that anyway...
While the objectification is bad, I think the issue of determining truth from lies should be solvable: public key cryptography seems simple enough. Have every public figure have their own key pair, and each official production have its own key pair. Then publish a signed hash or similar for each production the figure chooses to appear in. Any production without such a signature or with one that can't be verified is p…
Just make sure that key rotation works, no one ever loses their credentials, etc. Also — do you really need a signed signature to verify a celeb isn’t actually in a porn? It’s not like they’d sign that anyway...
Contrary to the article's stance that this would be used to create fake revenge porn or celebrity sex tapes that are taken as real, I'd expect this to devalue the real thing and give space for people to claim anything with their face in it is fake.
Contrary to the article's stance that this would be used to create fake revenge porn or celebrity sex tapes that are taken as real, I'd expect this to devalue the real thing and give space for people to claim anything with their face in it is fake.
We've already seen this with images and Photoshop. Society and their heuristics of belief will adjust as these new capabilities become widespread. What's more troubling is that as media becomes falsifiable, solid evidence of...well, anything, becomes hard to have. The ultimate loser there is the truth, sadly.
of course, talk is cheap. i dont have the chops to actually spec this out.