Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

ozonejl t1_je3bh7o wrote

Reply to comment by cinemachick in The guy behind the viral fake photo of the Pope in a puffy coat says using AI to make images of celebrities 'might be the line' — and calls for greater regulation by Lakerlion

Good to see a reasonable person who doesn’t just see a threat to their job and freaks out. New technology always comes with the same concerns and challenges. I’m kinda like…people already fall for loads of obviously, transparently fake shit on Facebook, but somehow this is gonna be so much worse?

2

RayTheGrey t1_je4adys wrote

Its the ease and speed of it that might be the difference.

6

EnsignElessar t1_je55ta5 wrote

Yes it will be worse. Because of scale. Instead of having to have an expert sit there making fakes and trying to spread them. You can automate most of that.

2

bobnoski t1_je55nlf wrote

the ease, speed, and accuracy of it. It's now possible to, within minutes of a live video being broadcasted. Use deep fake and AI voice generation to modify a video of a world leader. It doesn't have be something where the entire video is faked or edited, but say. edit a world leader saying "we will support Ukraine" to "we will no longer support Ukraine". Set it on blast, or in more repressive regimes run it as if that's the live view and you're going to have a way more difficult task of disproving this than an article that says "this world leader said this thing"

The more realistic, multi-faceted and abundant fakes are. the higher the chances are that people no longer trust the real thing.

1

almightySapling t1_je6kea4 wrote

I'm not worried about deepfake images, audio, or video.

I'm worried about deepfaked websites. I want to know that when I go to Associated Press, or Reddit, that I'm actually seeing that site with content sources from the appropriate avenues.

I do not want to live in a walled garden of my internet provider's AI, delivering me only the Xfinity Truth.

1