undefined | Better HN

0 pointseivarv7y ago0 comments

Or you could just be critical, and be aware of the limitations of media as it pertains to representation of truth and reality.

Besides, techniques for identifying fakes is likely to lag closely behind the techniques for producing them.

The first time we talked about "DeepFakes", someone I know pointed out that there is nothing inherently new in this issue. Media has been faked to manipulate the truth as long as there has been media.

Wether you trust the medium, a person, or a blockchain, trust is only as good as the information you base it upon – and there's always ways to circumvent it, or otherwise deceive you.

Also: There are some pretty big privacy issues (from what I understand) with what you describe.

0 comments

DrNuke7y ago

Unbiased courts or at the very least your legacy as an innocent person if you get however smothered need a bullet proof you did not do what deepfakes claimed you did. As for privacy, again, blockchain makes your data fully available to you only and you only need to disclose the relevant bits against the time-space accusation you face. Trust cannot be delegated but reliable technical means would help a lot.

eivarvOP7y ago

Why not just put less trust in video?

The courts should know that videos can be doctored, just as images can be photoshopped.

As the burden of proof lies with the accuser, it is they that would need a bullet proof argument that you did in face do what the video claims you did – and video is not alone in and of itself to establish truth.

As for the data gathering: the existence of the proposed data presents a threat for the subjects (and society) in and of itself.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse