Deepfake videos muddy the water even more.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Watch Zuckerberg confess: “Imagine this for a second: One man, with total control of billions of people’s stolen data, all their secrets, their lives, their futures.”

Except it's not him. Videos faking people out has moved ahead another step.

Deepfake video of Mark Zuckerberg presents a new challenge for Facebook

What goes around comes around.

Facebook refused to remove a doctored video of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi last month, but this week the company faces a new quandary: Will it remove a fake video of its own CEO, Mark Zuckerberg?

The video, posted to Facebook-owned Instagram over the weekend, falsely portrays Zuckerberg as saying, “Imagine this for a second: One man, with total control of billions of people’s stolen data, all their secrets, their lives, their futures.”...

...Last month Facebook declined to remove a manipulated video that made it appear House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was slurring her words. The company said it downranked the false video, meaning it would be seen in fewer people’s Facebook News Feeds. Pelosi later blasted the company, “I think they have proven — by not taking down something they know is false — that they were willing enablers of the Russian interference in our election,” she told California’s KQED.

The Zuckerberg one is pretty convincing. There's one of Trump that appears fake because the voice isn't perfect. I'm sure fixing that is only another tech move away.

 

[alfaniner]

Just waiting for The PDJT to deny something he actually said on camera as "Fake Views".

 

[theprestige]

Video is pretty much dead as a convenience citation.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Video is pretty much dead as a convenience citation.

What?

You think viral videos are dead or something?

 

[alfaniner]

Video is pretty much dead as a convenience citation.

What?

You think viral videos are dead or something?

Not just viral video. Media (meaning TV news) lives by its video sound bites. The PDJT doesn't acknowledge anything unless he's seen it on TV.

 

[TragicMonkey]

Doesn't Zuckerberg already look like a creepy robot? Something about his eyes and cheeks always looks off to me. Either he's had work done and it moved him close to the uncanny valley, or else he's just unfortunately rubbery in the face. I know he's super rich but I still can't find him attractive in the least. And I have really low standards!

 

[Childlike Empress]

Doesn't Zuckerberg already look like a creepy robot? Something about his eyes and cheeks always looks off to me. Either he's had work done and it moved him close to the uncanny valley, or else he's just unfortunately rubbery in the face. I know he's super rich but I still can't find him attractive in the least. And I have really low standards!

That's lazy, mean and dangerous!!!!!!!elf!

 

[theprestige]

What?



You think viral videos are dead or something?

?

Please actually read my post all the way through.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Not just viral video. Media (meaning TV news) lives by its video sound bites. The PDJT doesn't acknowledge anything unless he's seen it on TV.

I don't have a clue what either one of you is talking about. Who said anything about seeing these deepfakes on TV?

As for Trump, any fake video of Trump lying is moot. You don't need to fake that to show the real thing. There's still a Tweet for any/everything.

But one of Trump declaring war with Iran or insulting the Ayatollah could be problematic if spread around other countries. I suppose there could be deepfakes of Trump insulting the deplorables.

 

[TragicMonkey]

That's lazy, mean and dangerous!!!!!!!elf!

No way, Data was kinda hot. The eye color wasn't ideal, but that way he tilted his head to the side to indicate thought was adorable. And the early season uniforms revealed he had pretty good pecs for a science nerd. Tasha was right to run him through Demo Mode.

 

[JoeMorgue]

Yeah we're already in a post-truth world. Nobody is waiting for deepfakes to think stuff they've already decided is true.

If you're the kind of person who thinks that Bush did 9/11 or Hillary had a child sex pizza parlor dungeon, you aren't the kind of person who's waiting on evidence.

They will be some people in the margins affected by these videos, but not that many. People already either don't believe evidence or make it stuff without it now.

 

[theprestige]

Yeah we're already in a post-truth world. Nobody is waiting for deepfakes to think stuff they've already decided is true.

If you're the kind of person who thinks that Bush did 9/11 or Hillary had a child sex pizza parlor dungeon, you aren't the kind of person who's waiting on evidence.

They will be some people in the margins affected by these videos, but not that many. People already either don't believe evidence or make it stuff without it now.

I'm coming at it from the other direction.

For those of us who like asking for evidence or citations or whatever, "here's a video I found on the Internet, now do you believe me?" is no longer such a great argument.

 

[Bob001]

I don't have a clue what either one of you is talking about. Who said anything about seeing these deepfakes on TV?

As for Trump, any fake video of Trump lying is moot. You don't need to fake that to show the real thing. There's still a Tweet for any/everything.

But one of Trump declaring war with Iran or insulting the Ayatollah could be problematic if spread around other countries. I suppose there could be deepfakes of Trump insulting the deplorables.

Lotsa stories about deep fakes recently. They go way beyond one candidate or one campaign. They really strike at what we can know about the world.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...coming-were-not-ready/?utm_term=.e42df322ba6e
https://www.washingtonpost.com/tech...deos-we-are-outgunned/?utm_term=.061505bb59ed
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/10/opinion/deepfake-pelosi-video.html?searchResultPosition=4

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

I'm coming at it from the other direction.

For those of us who like asking for evidence or citations or whatever, "here's a video I found on the Internet, now do you believe me?" is no longer such a great argument.

Why would you use a random video as evidence anyway? You go to reliable sources.

 

[alfaniner]

Why would you use a random video as evidence anyway? You go to reliable sources.

That's not on until Sunday morning. It's on CNN.

 

[arthwollipot]

No way, Data was kinda hot. The eye color wasn't ideal, but that way he tilted his head to the side to indicate thought was adorable. And the early season uniforms revealed he had pretty good pecs for a science nerd. Tasha was right to run him through Demo Mode.

Mr Fully Functional.

 

[smartcooky]

No way, Data was kinda hot.

Tasha certainly thought so!

And so did Ensign D'Sora.... for a while.

 

[cullennz]

Watch Zuckerberg confess: “Imagine this for a second: One man, with total control of billions of people’s stolen data, all their secrets, their lives, their futures.”

Except it's not him. Videos faking people out has moved ahead another step.


What goes around comes around.

The Zuckerberg one is pretty convincing. There's one of Trump that appears fake because the voice isn't perfect. I'm sure fixing that is only another tech move away.

Are you talking about a different video than your link?

 

[Abooga]

Why would you use a random video as evidence anyway? You go to reliable sources.

Video used to be a very reliable source in many cases. Think of how Policemen are required to carry body-cameras in some places. Deepfakes are the end of that. One step after the other getting deeper and deeper into a technological dystopia... All data becoming digital and easily altered. Images and video unreliable. Post-truth indeed.

 

[Distracted1]

Alarming, but not unexpected. Another milestone along a route we have been traveling for a while.

As I age I find myself questioning whether some new development (be it a trending outlook or behavior that I find irrational, or a technology that seems troublesome and unnecessary at the same time) is causing me rational alarm, or simply triggering some kind of "get off my lawn" knee jerk defensiveness.
I can't see the erosion of every source of information about things that I did not personally witness as having any redeeming characteristics though. However hard I try to avoid being a technological Luddite.