I Deep Faked Myself, Here's Why It Matters

[@goddessofwar94]

Honestly, this is probably the type of tech that scares me the most. Deepfakes could be used to literally ruin someone’s life and reputation. Frightening…

[@HeidiThompson7]

On a bigger scale it could cause a revolution, coup, or war. It could absolutely destroy the legal system by filling it with fake evidence.

[@WhoAmEye_WhoAreEwe]

only if people [famous people excluded] have continually uploaded their image to the internet (maybe?)

[@fr61d]

@@floppathebased1492 And if you have uploaded to FB/Insta or the like, you still have some time to delete your accounts and have the pictures removed from their servers.

[@trackfresse]

The problem is rather that videos are no evidence for anything anymore. We loose what video-recording-technology gave us many years ago. And even historical video-recordings can be faked nowadays. Maybe someone will make Hitler look like a nice guy someday. 🫣

[@sinane.y]

@@floppathebased1492 Yeah sure. It's not like facial recognition cameras aren't being installed in every major city worldwide, with governments and big data working hand in hand.

[@j.mkamerling2470]

Imagine people deepfaking security tapes to frame people in the future. That’s scary.

[@TheRlhaugan]

Yes! It’s a show called “the capture” and it has two seasons.

[@GiRR007]

Then we are just gonna have to get better at detecting fakes. Also that's already illegal.

[@AVClarke]

The catch is; you can develop A.I. to make better deep fakes, but you also develop A.I. to better detect deep fakes.

[@DeeRizz]

Now I just wanna destroy future technology

[@cessposter]

you could also argue real footage was faked, within a court

[@JeffreyBoles]

I have 12 years of video editing experience. My specialization is interview editing. I look at and analyse faces through a screen all day, every (business) day. I could instantly tell when you showed a deep fake...except two times. I second guessed myself, and that is what scares me. Even with thousands of hours of carefully pinpointing imperfections in digital video of faces, I still couldn't be sure immediately. If I can't tell, how can we expect anyone to tell? I regret my hope as a child that I would live in an "interesting" time.

[@F3ARtheGERBIL]

could meta data help with some of this? like what does the meta data of a deep fake submitted as evidence look like?

[@F3ARtheGERBIL]

@@user-ze2zm4sz1b I think the issue with that is that nft’s are stored on a blockchain which does require actual resources and energy to support. The sustainability is already in question until greener alternatives are found and adding every video in existence to the equation does not sound sustainable. Also not sure how that would even be possible unless every video in existence was uploaded somewhere.

[@Oblivion_94]

May you live in interesting times...

[@kuroshite]

as a porn addict, i was able to tell all of them straight away 💀

[@silotx]

Also most video evidence are low res with poor lightning so it's much easy easier to fake.

[@EnteraName1876]

There's already a teenager out there who got their reputation ruined. She was just doing tiktoks and then someone decided to put her face on nude photos which then got scattered across the internet. She tried to explain that it's not her body and that it is not her but unfortunately people continue to comment about "she was asking for it", "ok, but when will you have only fans page" and other things.

[@gameratortylerstein5636]

First mistake was using Tiktok

[@siphobrisloks8133]

​@@gameratortylerstein5636tiktok sucks

[@dyhhffjuojg4sd]

Disgusting. It does NOT matter if she was "asking for it" or not because CONSENT is SACRED and so is the truth. Women are still victim to objectification, abuse, patronizing, minimizing, and pretty much everything horrible you can think of all because too many people still firmly believe deep down that they're inferior. These are OTHER TEENS already growing this way as well, and that's part of what really scares me. If it doesn't stop now, it's not going to stop any time soon.

[@Sk_irimi]

Don't ever post yourself on the internet

[@Leo-ok3uj]

What scares me the most is how long it took everyone to notice all of this, because I remembered that in 2014-2015 I talked and showed about deepfake to my parents, uncles and friends and saying how in 10 years we would have stuff like what we have already today (although with that very optimistic energy that I had in middleschool and never thinking about the bad things that could be made with it), and all of them told basically the same, that I am crazy or way too optimistic and that we wouldn’t have such stuff until like in a 100 years But guess what, NOT EVEN 10 YEARS HAVE HAPPENED

[@detachmentalist]

maybe your friends not believing it would have been a red flag since they should be in the same generation of these developments but people a generation or two older than us? they're never really going to believe that it is possible until it's right in front of them and threatening their very livelihood and existence a very hard lesson that I learned from my stubborn folks here

[@MelbourneMeMe]

When you run a business like Jonny, you schedule video topics around clicks, like aliens and conspiracies, but also you gotta just churn out a few videos of topics that everyone else has covered already, because it's easy. ChatGPT probably partly scripted this 😆

[@psgistheworstclubineurope]

Because of people like Elon Musk duh

[@psgistheworstclubineurope]

Ironic how adults dont believe such technology would be available so quickly yet adults are also the ones inventing this kind of technology

[@noob.168]

Not sure what kind of boomers you hang out with... I've been concerned about this for a long time

[@TJl919]

I actually wrote my master's thesis on this last year (and soon PhD)! I'm glad this is getting more attention. To contrast all the doom and gloom, Professor Hany Farid (UC Berkley) mentioned that the advancement of deepfakes is getting better, but so too is the technology used to detect it. But it is a shame something so impactful is being used for such nefarious purposes.

[@dickunddoof4684]

isnt that just an endless cycle? SW gets better at detecting it -> deepfakes get better because they know why it is being detected / it can be trained with the detectors themselves -> SW needs to get even better at detecting them -> even better deepfakes ->... at some point it might be truly impossible to tell the difference for a human.

[@Badmunky64]

Is there anything the average joe can use to detect deep fakes?

[@andersonojoshimite6047]

Wow! I'm interested in your work. I'm working on a thesis that sheds light on the impact of deepfakes in legal proceedings.

[@wlpxx7]

I feel like everyone saw this coming, and didnt do a single thing to stop it.

[@bitzoic4357]

Any chance it involves attested sensors and zk proofs? Everytime I see videos about this subject I think about the fact that we have solutions that aren't widely implemented yet

[@thatlittlehuman9238]

His last sentence made me realize another thing that could go horribly wrong…. “We shouldn’t believe everything that we see, no matter how real it looks.” The possibility that one day there would be a news report or something circulating on social media that is very real and dangerous, but the majority doesn’t believe it because “it could be AI”. False events can be believed, just as real events can be dismissed.

[@cloudyview]

Plus you can just hack the news station to run the deep fake video of the news casters telling people it's real/fake... Exciting!

[@ShankarSivarajan]

The news lying to you has been a problem long before this technology was developed.

[@terryholmes8546]

Yeah......covid taught us that the media doesn't need deep fakes for us to question the narrative.... Maybe if they didn't have an established rep for hying and lying...

[@Luciphell]

Kind of like most of the world being convinced there was a violent insurrection that almost led to the downfall of the free world on Jan. 6th 2021. Doesn't take AI to fool a crowd.

[@GiRR007]

Its called being responsible people should be believing the first thing they hear on the internet anyway that is NEVER a good thing...

[@TheColdHarshTruth]

This will be the government’s new answer to everything when called out for their crimes.

[@Journal_Haris]

Trust issues with Johnny since this video published: 📈

[@EllisEllo]

He isn't smiling nor looks happy, it could be real.

[@Dr.SyedSaifAbbasNaqvi]

He never left Vox. This channel is run by deep fakes.

[@johnnyharris]

😂😂

[@johnnyharris]

😂😂

[@johnnyharris]

😂😂

[@jojoqie]

There are scammers out there right now, calling you thru face time and deep fake to claim to be a person you know and scam you. Just be careful.

[@Yasminh-]

thats why its good I never do video call with anyone ,if suddenly someone would decide to video call me I would not even accept the call , not gonna give any technology my face

[@kimberlycarter369]

I’m old, and back in 1995-ish I remember people talking about being afraid in the near future that we would no longer be able to distinguish real video from fake. Deep fakes are exactly what they where talking about before it had this name.

[@martinfoy8700]

Agreed. I was just mentioning that it’s kind of a good thing because there’s a video out of me, cheating on my wife with two bridesmaids from our wedding. I worry daily about her seeing me hitting them in the ass and rinsing off in their mouths. I’m actually more concerned about their husbands finding out because they will absolutely have my head in a box. My wife is pretty easy to gaslight so I can just tell her that it’s a fake and share this video with her. Also I’m class of 94. You’re only as old as you feel Kim

[@peterlewis2178]

@@martinfoy8700 You're a terrible person to talk so nonchalantly about gaslighting your wife. That's straight-up emotional abuse, I feel so bad for your wife. Unless you're a troll or AI message, but in that case you're still doing a terrible thing.

[@dannyarcher6370]

@@martinfoy8700 I think you meant to say, "You're only as old as the bridesmaids you feel up."

[@earthn1447]

They were talking about this in the sixties during Vietnam war

[@MadHau5]

@@peterlewis2178 definitely seems like ragebait

[@CoughitsKath]

i am not normally a technology doomer - quite the opposite usually - but when these started popping up in earnest a few years, it struck me as a real terrifying pandora's box. they've low key terrified me ever since. also, since you talk about deep fake tech in entertainment, i do need to point out that it's not all good news there, and this is a big chunk of what wga and sag strikers are hoping to mitigate with their recent union actions. it has the potential to really change a lot of working artists' lives and not necessarily for the better

[@EricKay_Scifi]

My most recent novel, Above Dark Waters, imagines content creators using brainwave data and generative AI to create a digital fentanyl, making you scroll and click forever.

[@JoshuaGold1]

The problem with having software that is trained to detect AI is that it will force the deepfakes to be so much better, and then it will truly be indistinguishable from reality.

[@nielskorpel8860]

Yeah. I hope we don't go from "I can spot fakes so it is fine" to "I can't spot fakes but it is still fine because we have bots". Because that last one is a delusion we use to hold on to the benefits of AI.

[@zeppie_]

Combatting hackers has always been a game of cat and mouse. Not much will change on this front, I believe

[@googane7755]

That is the exact problem with GANs. They deliberately use a discriminator that tells the deepfake generator whether if the image is real or not to generate even better fake images. Looking for software to better detect fakes is completely counter productive

[@AquaeAtrae]

As Johnny's video illustrated well, the "detective" software is ALREADY a key component of these self-improving algorithms... hence defeating any subsequent software and training of a similar quality.

[@nielskorpel8860]

But this delusion is useful: it allows us an excuse not to argue that this AI technology should not exist. Que the 'this is fine' meme.

[@adolfstalin1497]

The worst part about this isn't that it's dangerous and it can spread wrong information but that it does absolutely no good to us whatsoever

[@psgistheworstclubineurope]

Nice username btw

[@mustangracer5124]

Not for US.. but it has been used extensively by MSM to fool the fools who watch them.. Trump was deep faked 1,000 times already.

[@josiamoog6619]

In what world is this the worst part??

[@stop08it]

Huh??

[@adolfstalin1497]

@@josiamoog6619 basically what i'm trying to say is that deepfakes are only used for bad. Even the "good" things listed in the video aren't exactly great by themselves And even then they definitely don't nearly make up for all the bad deepfakes do.

[@JaegerZ999]

One day I won’t need a mask for videos anymore, just pick a new face in post production.

[@girishanejadelhi]

Good to see you here shooter!!!

[@ihateorangecat]

I really like your videos man.🔥

[@GiRR007]

V tuber but without the cringe.

[@iwilldi]

what for?

[@kylehurley5994]

When's the collab with admin results?

[@AwokenEntertainment]

it's scary how quick this has became a reality..

[@DeadeyeDaily]

Meanwhile, politicians have been "blurring the line between fact and fiction" and "undermining public trust" for WAAAAY longer. The only difference is instead of just undermining trust in recorded images and videos, THEY have been undermining trust in the very institutions that potentiate social prosperity, generally.

[@HarlowAshensky]

The scary one my grandparents ran into was a believeable AI robocall targeting seniors. It was so close to a real person reacting to their questions before hitting a loop. Crazy how fast the possibilities spread

[@Jackson54321]

Deepfakes also impact Hollywood. Companies save hundreds of millions just to have AI instead of real humans.

[@ekothesilent9456]

Wait until you have the robocalls targeting seniors perfectly mimicking the voice patterns and tones of their dead grand kids. It’s all fun and games until we start creating ai ghosts that haunt people 24/7 to get something out of them. This is happening.

[@cnrspiller3549]

Tosh! We will all get used to it. Your grand kids call you up and say they're stuck abroad, wire them some money. Sure, you say - what was that nursery rhyme I always sang to you when I bounced you on my knee?

[@yamanawrooz5132]

I think robo calls will be replaced by fake online friends 100% generated by AI which will have a specific goal to sell you something or manipulate you into voting for someone. I think in the future even low level politicians like mayors or sheriffs would hire agencies to target constituents by either online or physical AI.

[@jozroz2165]

The problem I foresee with developing AI to better identify deep fakes, is that it could simply fuel the further development of deep fakes since they can use the identifying techniques to patch their own tells. I mean, there's a reason GAN training involves identification and counter-action based on the identifiers. By fighting it in its own field I fear we may instead be playing right into the problem.

[@0L1]

Anyone remembers good old-fashion viruses and anti-virus software being a thing, an actual threat, always competing with each other? I guess a new era of that is approaching.

[@kastieldev6732]

smartest comment i have seen

[@marciavox8105]

Yeah, like the evolutionary race between predators and prey animals. Each one evolves as a result of the others adaptations

[@nwilt7114]

Well we should start by holding all the scammers accountable and that would reduce the amount of fukery.

[@iudoncare6360]

Like bacteria and abtibiotics...

[@themadman6310]

Face to face communication is going to become alot more valuable

[@azcardguy7825]

How good deep fakes have gotten in such a short amount of time is horrifying. We are critically underestimating the problems that this is going to cause.

[@Madwonk]

I took a class with some professional photograph doctoring experts a while back. Mainly, it's a company that works to detect manipulation of pictures of politicians and other figures of importance. One of the hardest cases they had was a photo that *looked* right, metadata came up good, all of the anecdotal data made it seem legit etc etc (except it wasn't possible because the two people pictured had never met). Often, photoshop/AI will leave behind weird artifacts in the compression algorithms for JPEG or video that can be detected and they weren't showing up. So how did they fake the photo? They photoshopped it, printed it out, then took a picture of the picture! No digital trail to speak of!

[@DarthObscurity]

Would have been scanned. No way a picture of a picture wasn't detected lol.

[@realtimestatic]

That’s actually really smart

[@sadrakeyhany7477]

200 IQ play

[@mister_duke]

but then u could see in the metadata that is was taken in a different location on a different date

[@sbo3]

I'm confused how this is apparently smart because you can 100% tell when you take a photo of a photo. Even the person above who said it would have to be a scan - surely even a scan can be detectable?!

[@Bobrae.]

Entertainment-wise, this is part of the reason why the actors/SAG are on strike now, too.

[@occamsshavecream4541]

That surely adds new meaning to the expression, "Just another pretty face."

[@bigdeal6852]

Yeah....they know their somewhat at a turning point. Because the film industry can make movies without them being there. Which saves money in many ways with these high priced celebrities. So that's one big reason why they are on strike and "of course" they want more money.

[@mystraunt2705]

@bigdeal6852 this is still a serious issue though. Artists are all going to lose their jobs if we dont stop the development of ai or outlaw it or somthing.

[@bigdeal6852]

@@mystraunt2705 I will agree with you on that ! I'm sure eventually it will get done. Mostly because it can be dangerous. They might start a detection system and put in place copyright laws or something even more aggressive. I don't know....but it definitely can have an effect on Hollywood. 🤷

[@professorxavier9692]

​@@bigdeal6852they're

[@lawrencetchen]

My general response to the entire field of generative AI is a feeling of grief and tragedy. Sadness that we will in the very near future need to expend so much of our cognitive and emotional efforts judging how much we trust *everything* . I'm tired just thinking about it. I know it's here to stay. And nearly all who use this technology are fueled by greed, and that all their victims will be punished for being trusting. It is just so devastating knowing that there will be an evolutionary force that will encode a lower fitness and survival to those who trust.

[@jJust_NO_]

firstly, before we get devastated, what are the cons, the losses? just dont engage?

[@jovita9323]

Beautifully said. I get what you're saying. The world is exausting and complicated as it is... That's why I believe that alternative movements will rise and people will voluntarily choose to limit technology or even go off grid.

[@stevej.7926]

@@jovita9323this is my belief as well. I think humanity is yearning for a recalibration.

[@mustangnawt1]

Agree

[@webstercat]

This is deep fake 🌍

[@surajvkothari]

The problem with using AI to detect deepfakes is that, just like in GANS, the forging AI is encouraged to get better. Eventually any AI detection system will just output fake/not fake with 50% probability which won't be good enough to know what's real and what's not!

[@CitizenMio]

The thing I find most fascinating/scary is that they already factored in our weaknesses. Research found that people were already more inclined to believe faked images of faces were real over the actual real images. Apparently we have a super normal stimulus for things that are more real than real and the algorithms stumbled upon it and are already optimizing for it. The equivalent of putting an ostrich chick in a chickens nest and momma being proud cuz her baby is so big and chunky🤩 Also this is just with images, we no doubt have similar less visible weaknesses everywhere. That's got to be the silliest way to go if we ever go too far down that road. No nukes or shiny robots with guns, just hoards of brain dead zombies optimized to stay calm and consume.

[@dannyarcher6370]

Indeed. This is especially true given that the data is discrete, which means that as long as the generative AI can improve up to the limits of the relatively low number of pixel resolution and colour resolution, any floating point errors in generation will be hidden by the relatively coarse distribution of the output format.

[@ryangrady9802]

I read that AI can detect deepfakes with up to 94% accuracy… what about the false positives/ false negatives? If a human can’t tell the difference, and an AI can’t tell the difference, it renders videos and images validity up for question… However, the British and American legal system has predated this technology by hundreds of years, our society is going to be okay, even though this will be a big change we see in our lifetime.

[@meatballhead15]

I worry for all the young people that use trendy apps to put 'filters' on their faces... feeding all sorts of data about the points of their faces... they're feeding into the massive databases that can easily make a copy of them. I know this might make me sound like an old codger (I'm in my late 30s), but it's a real worry nevertheless.

[@kriscox4019]

Except you don’t need the filter. The upload to any site is enough. Something some parents are thinking about when deciding to show their kids faces online or not.

[@Animebryan2]

And Tiktok is owned by China. This is why Trump wanted to ban Tiktok from this country. The datamining of personal info always was the real threat. And let's not pretend that the NSA & FBI wouldn't take advantage of this to frame someone that they had set their sights on. Makes you wonder who actually came up with this idea & what was the original intent.

[@dannnnydannnn5201]

I doubt filters are any worse than uploading image after image on social media.

[@Gimmefish]

​@@kriscox4019 !! I wont give my kid a phone untill he's 16, idc if he hates me.

[@Studywise_io]

@@Gimmefish i got mine at 18

[@nichad29]

So i guess by not participating in social media to the extent of posting hundreds of photos of myself i protected myself from deep fakes

[@GiRR007]

Yes Maybe deep fakes are the round about cure for social media we were looking for .

[@ExtraCarrot]

I was just thinking this :) We are a rare breed!

[@MandoCarlrisian]

I'm sick to my stomach that I created a tinder profile lol. But other than that and a few snaps shared with people hopefully 😢 my face is safe??

[@hattielankford4775]

You know how you don't get to expect the right to privacy in public in this country? I think people willing to deepfake you would be willing to have a PI take some candid photos, among dozens of other possibilities.

[@cain_chamomille]

As much as it is sounds rad, we have to remind ourselves that as long as our phone is connected to Internet, _it's possible to steal your camera pictures and have your images taken. Even if you do not post them on socmed._

[@UPLYNXED]

This stuff is honestly scary, and quite demoralising to think that we've taken this path towards less trust as a species in a time when so many other rights and verifiable collective truths are already eroding away. It feels like we're collectively drowning and every hand reaching down towards us is only pushing us down further instead of pulling us to safety.

[@maxpro751]

Time to read books.

[@exisfohdr3904]

Ha! There is no safety, just an illusion of it. It is human nature to immediately distrust. It comes from survival instincts.

[@CliffSturgeon]

​@@maxpro751That can be fabricated, too, but more to the point, books are pretty bad at keeping up with topical content such as emergency action or warnings. Dissemination of info in real time is where the real threat is.

[@definitelynotatroll246]

Uncle ted warned us

[@ClaíomhDClover]

pretty much what living life is

[@stephenbeck6410]

There was a movie called Looker back in the 80s, and the basic idea was they had this device that could do a full body scan of high-price models and use the data to create visual representations they could use in advertisements. Then they would kill off the models and “hire out” the faked, virtual model. My point is, the current events in AI have a similar theme (not the killing off part, just the fake version part, obviously)

[@PetrPechar1975]

Ah yes. That was Michael Crichton. Always the visionary.

[@Neferpitou-]

Its unbelievable to me how fast AI is improving, what we had a year ago doesn't even compare to what we have today.

[@axelastori484]

Like airplanes

[@patrickangelobalasa]

Yeah it's a tech that's definitely constantly evolving. Three years ago, concerns of AI replacing actors, writers, etc would've been unthinkable, but now....

[@mason96575]

@@axelastori484 lol 🤦

[@Charlie-phlezk]

@@axelastori484 thank you. exactly. hyperbolic comment is hyperbole.

[@Ok-lu8gx]

ok

[@josefarrington]

Probably the way to combat deep fakes is to use the pixels of an original image to watermark it, and then use software to detect those watermarks. This way when the pixels in the image are manipulated, the water mark will get disturbed and the "verification" software will detect the deep fake.

[@qj0n]

The way GANs work is that they train the generator to fool a detector, so that it's unable to recognize real photo from generated. Simple watermark algorithms will be replicated by generator, once you add it to detector. This is why inherently machines are worse in detecting deepfakes than human - generators are trained to fool the machine, fooling humans is kind of side effect It's possible to use some asymmetric cryptography (digital signature) to avoid it, although it's probably easier to put in metadata, not data itself. But you need to put secret keys in every recording device and once you extract it, you can use it to sign any content. Or you can e.g. play deepfaked voice and record it with a device which will sign it

[@josefarrington]

@@qj0n "But you need to put secret keys in every recording device and once you extract it, you can use it to sign any content." I was thinking that the secret key could also contain GPS position and time of the recording. This way you need to know where/when the image was created in order to break the encryption process. If we want to make it more secure, we could make every device send an encryption key to some national database(guarded like Forth Knox) and that can provide third party verification of every image recorded by any device. But this is a huge stretch.

[@qj0n]

@@josefarrington I'm not sure if I'm following - you can put geoposition and timestamp in signed metadata, but in order to make sign verifiable, you need to know the key and trust it, so our has to be stored in the device We can make it impossible to read it like we do with sim cards or smart cards or yubikey. But still somebody can use this hardware to sign fake data Uploading signatures to external entity (fort knox or blockchain) is fine to verify date, but that's all unfortunately

[@Gigaamped]

easy, feed the watermarking program a pure white or black image and easily reverse engineer the watermark algorithm by comparing the hex values of changed pixels

[@qj0n]

@@Gigaamped ...unless watermark is calculated with asymmetric cryptography like RSA or secure hash like hmac

[@SxC97]

Fun fact, one of the coolest techniques for detecting deepfakes is to create a system that amplifies the reds in the video in question. As your heart pumps blood through your face, it becomes slightly more red, then back to normal in a regular cadence (the difference is extremely subtle, which is why we increase the saturation of the reds to make it more obvious). Current deepfake technology does not take into account this subtle shift in colors and even if it does, the regular cadence is not there. This is the result of a recent paper on deepfake detection I read, I'll try and dig up the name. (EDIT: I found it! The name of the paper is "FakeCatcher: Detection of Synthetic Portrait Videos using Biological Signals") Obviously future systems might take this into account, but I thought it was clever and worth sharing none the less!

[@nielskorpel8860]

Will this still work in 3000 years. I only accept solutions that work for 3000 years. Otherwise, something fundamental has changed for the worse.

[@interestedinstuff]

That is very cool. Blood pumps regularly so would be a clock the deep fake would have to copy. Iris fluctuations too I imagine. Breathing patterns. One must breath in order to speak so if words are happening while the lungs are filling up, well that's just fake. Trouble is, it will be far easier to make and share fakes than the platforms scanning everything. One day they will though I assume. Difficult times ahead.

[@yhz2K]

​@@nielskorpel8860by that time humans will mass suicide due to the greed

[@sgjoni]

As soon as you create an AI solution to detect deep fake you have a new bar for the adversarial model to make a better deep fake 😂

[@mloweFR3SH]

Not too helpful if you're a darker-skinned person.

[@LegIIAVGCA]

If you look deeply at the digital files, you can see clearly the cut and past aspects of the file… even pixels mapping shows massive read/writes of the file in question. But, that takes a tech geek to be brought into court.

[@devonscotttaylor]

Just wanted to thank you for the content you produce. I feel as if true original human-produced media is a dying art form and not something to take for granted. Great vid! Cheers!

[@johnnyharris]

thanks for being here!

[@MrGameFreak777]

I don't believe AI will ever replace humans when it comes to making art. AI can only mix established art, like a blender. AI does not understand the art. It cannot create anything with a deeper meaning. Anything that says something about the world, like great art does. Humans are inspired by previous art, they understand the art. Humans combine the art that inspires them with personal experience and something new through real creativity to make great art.

[@squeezy1001]

@@johnnyharris I’m glad you clarified that the deepfake was of Nick the studio manager. For a second I thought we were getting a “How Johnny Harris Stole Will Forte’s Identity” video.

[@enkryptron]

@@johnnyharris Plot twist: He's an AI.

[@artyparty_av]

@@MrGameFreak777 Yet

[@colemessina3439]

This video was especially scary, Johnny usually gives solutions to all of where we can go from here at the end of his videos, while I may not agree with all of them it shows that we have a grasp on what to do. This is not that case, this truly could be a Pandora’s box in which none of us know what to do with it. With a lot of the developments in technology I have faith we can solve them in the future and the elderly congress simply can’t wrap their head around any of it, but even the younger generations don’t know how to combat this, very scary, need an uplifting video after this one Johnny haha.

[@miket.4192]

the solution is to remember what it really is to be a human - not an easy task in this world, but possible. frequency, vibration, and energy is the answer to everything

[@DrErnst]

maybe solution is to disconnect from the internet and don't post your images online of your face..

[@artpinsof5836]

Actually, at the end of the video, he said that we were going to have to have better algorithms to detect, and he even mentioned halfway through the video about how the government is working on this

[@stevo999]

The solution is to simply go outside

[@Jack_Parsons-666]

The solution is we go back to hand-delivered newspapers/ paper magazines/ books you buy at Barnes and Noble as a "back up" source of truth. News reporters use film cameras and analog audio for "on the record" recordings. Digital info will still be useful but it will require analog-world "receipts" of known provenance. That will buy us time until people start deep-faking 3D solid objects. Perhaps humans will reach "peak screen time" where a plateau is reached and then we strategically retreat back into the analog world and intentionally anchor ourselves just enough to stay sane. Put simply, if the internet becomes completely unusable, at some point people will stop using it.

[@JurandirGouveia]

Your storytelling is amazing, and I'm glad it is used to open our eyes.

[@Ok-lu8gx]

ok

[@kingz2119]

pun intended ?

[@Windxchild]

This is really scary! If you know something might be a deep fake, you can spot that something is off. But if you don’t know that something might be a deep fake, you don’t have any reason to question if this is real, and the “errors” are subtle enough to not stand out…

[@AlexanderNorton]

There’s actually a solution currently being proposed in the US. Going forward, every pixel in recorded media is to contain encrypted metadata that tells us what image the pixel belongs to. If that pixel is found in other media, it means it’s a fake. The same could be applied to art generation to prevent theft. Maybe you could research this for a future video!

[@makisekurisu4674]

Idk sounds like NFTs.. Lol

[@rizizum]

I want to understand how the fuck are you going to encrypt and decrypt millions of pixels on every image you have to see without it taking 10 minutes to load

[@colvinvandommelen2156]

@@makisekurisu4674idk sounds like you don’t know what you’re talking about

[@The.Sponge]

​@@rizizum In addition to that, how would matching pixels fix anything? It's not like the deep fakes wouldn't just observe the colors and only copy that data. It wouldn't blatantly copy the image name and spew it all over the image? If your goal is to check if the file contains the proper names and if it doesn't then it isn't correct, then the deepfake could just contain that name on every pixel and it just becomes a problem of deeming which is the correct one. Literally what we are already doing. Viewing where you get your information from; if its from youtube or an official court of law database is the most important thing, because the diffrence is pretty large.

[@-morrow]

doesn't make much sense for every pixel, since one pixel isn't really deserving protection. just hash one or multiple images/frames and digitally sign/encrypt the hash. this can then be used for verification. if a image/frame doesn't come with a trusted signature it's should be deemed fake by default.

[@TC_exe]

I feel like technology that detects deepfakes would be a never ending arms race. That same technology could be used to improve the fakes themselves. Ad infinitum.

[@artyparty_av]

A way we might be able to verify authenticity is a blockchain clearinghouse. But the computing power involved to authenticate all digital media seems immense.

[@DamianTheFirst]

@@artyparty_av and what exactly would prevent anyone from digitally signing deepfake videos and verifying them as legit? Blockchain is just a way of storing data. Just one more type of a database.

[@chazmuzz]

@@DamianTheFirst companies sell trust as a product - eg DigiCert. If they trust it then so can you

[@ShawnFumo]

@@chazmuzzYeah, though it doesn’t even have to be blockchain. The easiest thing (which we should pressure companies for) is the manufactures of cameras/camcorders to digitally sign the raw files. That way if you kept the the equivalent of a film negative, you have some pretty good proof of authenticity. It certainly doesn’t solve all the problems, but it’d be a good first step. And I’m guessing KZbin, Facebook, etc keep the originals that were uploaded to them, even if they give out compressed versions. They could validate the original signature and sign the new compressed one with their own signature, perhaps with some description of how it was edited (like taking just a portion of an original video, or changing contrast on an image), and a copy of the original signature. In that scenario, you need to trust KZbin and Facebook, but is better than nothing. And then you know which service it came from and law enforcement can ask them for the original file.

[@ShawnFumo]

The trickiest part is keeping that chain from the manufacturer to a small file on social media, considering the sizes involved. An original video file can be huge. Usually you’d be editing it before uploading it anywhere and a non-professional may not keep the original footage around. Something like Adobe Premiere could keep track of all the cuts with time codes and the signatures of the original files, but it gets a bit involved for them to implement. And if you didn’t keep the original files, it still just proves that you edited some clips on a certain date. Though still an improvement.

[@pafee-etndoitgsest-thaette5284]

The only way to prevent your own face from being abused is leaving as little photos and videos of yourself online as possible. Which is hard when you're in politics, journalism or entertainment.

[@ZennyKravitz]

asymmetric face painting. Entertainers can easily do this. But others are screwed.

[@Jess-h2h4w]

Now i worried about people posting photo or video of them in social media. That mean they can be targeted too, not only public figure

[@bunaul]

I come to this video every now and then to experience just how good and indistinguishable deep fakes have gotten.

[@Draemn]

The day when deep fakes become extremely common place I don't know how I'll be able to verify information. This is definitely a very challenging concept to understand what to do when literally anything can be faked.

[@newagain9964]

It’s no more challenging than verifying digital documents.

[@jamespfitz]

How do we verify documents?

[@kindlin]

@@jamespfitz Digit signatures.

[@syritasdoneitgoodytwoshoes2471]

they are already

[@jamespfitz]

@@newagain9964 Or paper documents.

[@VPB1970]

This is truly very dangerous and can lead to absolute injustice. Just think (as you well stated) about the evidence and the credibility (or lack off) of any proof used to either accuse or exonerate someone. This can be a serious issue everywhere around the world.

[@mattd624]

Imagine your child is calling you and needs help, but it’s not your child. I like the idea of having a secret code, so you know it’s them. And you probably have to change it often! I’m sure bad actors would pick up on that and have the fake child say, “I don’t remember the code.” You could then verify their location if they are on their phone. I think with enough conversation you’d probably figure out it’s not them, though, unless AI was trained on your child’s speech for a while. This is the kind of thing that concerns me-where you’re tricked by an urgent request of what sounds like someone you know…like those guys who stole $35mil. If you’re rich, you now have even greater trust issues! 😮

[@megd9849]

I LOVE the little yellow line you had on your incogni promotional section. Usually I'd skip ahead until I felt like I was back to the content, but it gave me the patience to sit through it (and I realized it's actually an interesting product).

[@fattiger6957]

Mix deepfake with AI voice imitation and you can completely fake a person. And the scary thing is how fast the technology is advancing. Currently, you can spot a deepfake if you know what you're looking for. A couple years ago, it was very easy to spot a deepfake. In a couple years from now, it will be indistinguishable from real life. That's another reason why AI is so worrying. It will be able to do anyone's job. Even actors, writers and artists can be replaced. And companies will love them because AI can't complain. It doesn't need lunchbreaks or vacation pay or workers' rights. AI can make humans redundant. But don't worry, the government will step in when AI can replace CEOs and politicians. But screw all the middle class workers of course.

[@moskon95]

I kinda disagree. If it'd be true and AI would make millions of people lose their jobs, then those people would not have the money to buy the things the AI makes, thus making the AI itself lose its job and in the end the people would get their jobs back. I would not fear mass unemployment, because while it may be very easy to see what jobs become irrelevant/replaced by AI, its impossible to see what jobs will be created through it and the time and resources it frees.

[@marieindia8116]

​@@moskon95its not job loss that is the problem. Identity theft, control and harrassment get more powerful tools. No one will be safe.

[@appa609]

AI voice is still pretty far behind. Big studios still use voice actors.

[@DylanT18]

A friend of mine recently had his Instagram hacked. They took a video of him talking into the camera and tried to scam people with it. Not only did I think it was completely real but it sounded like him as well. Shit was crazy

[@dokidelta1175]

@@DylanT18 A friend of mine LAST YEAR made a post about a fake account that was selling a deepfaked onlyfans of her.

[@wlpxx7]

I feel like everyone saw this coming, and didnt do a single thing to stop it.

[@noname_noname_]

I dont think that anyone can do anything about it.. it was inevitable.

[@vee-bee-a]

Virtual insanity.

[@sudonim7552]

nah I have zero interest in stopping this

[@Noooiiiissseee]

Once the proof of concept is out there, you can never stop anything.

[@Omega-mr1jg]

Better if we kept it open instead of try to knowingly give it to the government

[@allasperans3984]

As a person with just a slight prosapognosia (I'm autistic and I'm basically bad at recognizing&remembering faces) that was even more confusing, bc you need to point out for me that faces are actually changing and I still couldn't see it all the time... When I don't have things like facial hair as clues, it's very difficult to see that something has changed 😅

[@mariekatherine5238]

Whew! I’m glad I’m not the only one! I had to go back twice and rewatch at slow speed to see the facial changes.

[@2roxfox]

I had the same reaction - didn’t realise his face was changing until he pointed it out.

[@zebatov]

I’m an autist, and I remember names and faces very well. Strange.

[@PolarBearFromNY]

I'm autistic too and I'm really good at remembering faces

[@allasperans3984]

@@PolarBearFromNY yeah, it's all about the extremes sometimes 😅 I wasn't saying that all autistic are bad with faces, just to clarify, but it is a common trait.

[@thelegend8570]

The problem with using AI to detect AI generated content, is that you can just plug the AI-dector AI into the GAN and use it to train better deepfakes.

[@ChimobiHD]

Exactly. It's a doom loop.

[@BearsThatCare]

I wish you would have talked about this in the context of the ongoing actors strike. That part is really important.

[@batyushki]

We've already seen a huge backlash against media due to misinformation and information overload; the corruption of digital and audio data is going to lead to a similar loss of trust and rejection of most sources of information, except those that you already "trust". But the ones you already trust are usually biased towards your current beliefs, reinforcing them and preventing you from accessing information that could lead to a change of opinion.

[@sew_gal7340]

It's easy, old school encyclopedias

[@J-Random-Luser]

The main thing that terrifies me about them is that people could use them to make non-consensual pornography of people, including children. I think there is a genuine argument to be made for this technology to be genuinely *banned* to try and crack down on it. Sure, banning it might force people underground to get them, but similar to how in computer security, its not always about making it 100% impossible to gain access to, but just enough or a little bit further to prevent easy access. Less people using this technology is good.

[@OLIVERNIESLEN]

yes the deepfakes of kids are bad it sounds bad to say but i think the pedo's prefer originals

[@ASLUHLUHC3]

There are many more terrifying things than deepfake pornography. Like fake evidence used in court, or mass misinformation that leading to warfare or genocides.

[@ASLUHLUHC3]

Without a solution to verification, the best-case scenario would just be pornography

[@bertilandersson6606]

You are looking at it from a pessimistic angle. If it is cheep and easy to make fake explicit content then there is a smaller share to profit from. This will put digital pimps out of business and save people from be caught up in content creation whit this kind of contents. Maybe we can also train these ai to cure people from addictions and end up in a world where there is no need for this kind of consumption...

[@J-Random-Luser]

@@bertilandersson6606 Given that anyone nowadays can spin up their own A.I model with tools like hugging face I don't think market forces would do anything to combat this issue.

[@Le_Petit_Lapin]

Your clip from 5:06 for the next minute is one of the best simple explanations of what a GAN is that I've seen.

[@beckfilmtv7903]

I got them all right. It's the very very subtle movement of the face that gives it away mostly. I do work as an editor, have watched countless hours of interviews and looked for details most people would never notice, and I have also dived into ai generated images, so I guess that is why. I don't blame most people for not being able to tell the difference. They are really good fakes.

[@williamsorianodiputado]

As a congressman from El Salvador, thanks for creating and sharing this content. I’m taking notes on this.

[@ScizorShorts7]

I’m not criticising your effort but shouldn’t you be focusing on your countries HDI, Covid recovery and leverage against the big corporations that are exploiting your country?

[@sam-ww1wk]

@@ScizorShorts7 Why assume he's not? That's like saying the same about our lawmakers. Horrible logic, bud.

[@EugeneYus]

More important now than ever to put the internet down. Use it for your personal tools not for figuring out if something is real or not.

[@mary_syl]

I could tell the initial fakes immediately but I agree it's scary because at this point it's only tiny nuances left and those will be improved on soon. Reality is completely going to disappear. We're screwed.

[@qrowing]

Me, too. Apparently we're wizards! I was very surprised when Johnny said he couldn't tell the difference, because it was pretty clear, at least to me. Scary to think how many people those clips would fool.

[@JCSAXON]

I warned of this decades ago & now It’s finally caught up with us. This is gonna be messed up beyond our imagination. Hang in there cuz this is one hellish ride

[@lthereader5670]

I have a feeling we will have to resort to going back to pre-photograph age, or even pre-newspaper age regarding information; unless something is happening right in front of you, you have every right to doubt its legitimacy.

[@coolida23511]

Exactly. This technology is becoming too much and I'm fearful of where we are headed as a society.

[@singingstars5006]

We are there now.

[@mokkes7340]

Great video! I suspect that this will end up in the same way as with ad blockers. As software will improve to detect deepfakes, the other side will try to get their hands on this method and implement it into their 'detective' software to make it even better.

[@GG_Booboo]

They may look fun and exciting, but this is a dangerous technology! I see it being useful in movies, like saying portraying a younger actor, but that's about it. Also "this person does not exist" is one of those websites that gives me the creeps!

[@TerryJGeo]

It is scary how fast AI is developing. As a writer/performer, I've been perfecting my craft over my lifetime and I'm finally at the stage where I can say I'm really good at what I do. I don't want my dream, my decades of hard work and my talent to be swallowed up by a machine that can write a book in a day and take starring roles in films. At the moment, I do the majority of my work on stage - but how long until holograms will take that space too?

[@tseikkisnelkytkaks9013]

I would imagine the work gets much less unfortunately. Much of it is already completely for-profit corporate bs anyway producing "good enough" results to sell to some group of people easily. But looking at other things where this has already happened - completely machine-crafted items for example, or bands touring - people still have an appreciation for buying a 100% handcrafted item and it has prestige to it, and they have appreciation for seeing band members in person, the actual human beings, performing their songs, rather than just listening to the often superior studio performance on record or a video. So my prediction is that artists will lose a ton of jobs but there will still be lots of demand for high-quality human handcrafted things in all forms and personal appearances. As for writing, I don't know where the limits of LLM's go. They still can only guess the next word in a sentence and they cannot play chess, so to make a very thought out poem, for example, is still beyond their reach to do as well as a human poet who can think backwards and understand concepts rather than just process everything linearly. I have no idea how long this will be the case tho.

[@MisterTheRobot]

In last sentence actually.... holograms were a thing way way back in time. Our windows can be holograms too! The filter for sunglasses also! Arduino holograms also do exist and they are not that common, but every device like telephone, TV, monitor of PC etc... can be holograms!

[@la6136]

Personally I think human artists are way more interesting and relatable then bots or holograms will ever be. I will always be more impressed with a humans talent because I know it takes more hard work than a machine that is being programmed.

[@RealDrDoom]

This is one of those technologies that provide us very little value, aside for its use in movies and other media. And it's extremely dangerous

[@Tindog81476]

I was able to tell all the deepfakes apart, and guess correctly. You are right though I had to look for it, and it may be way harder to do if you are seeing it on something like a phone for example. The way I can tell is lighting and water, I have a sister who animates, and basically, the stuff that is the hardest for her to animate, basically is what is the hardest for the AI to get right, for example to even get a Pixar level quality of lighting often requires a wall of computers to make one image, combine that with AI (another intensive computer program) and it just becomes really hard for deep fakes to go beyond a certain point, because the computing power is immense, so deep fakes often stop at the line of "good enough" so if you know what is the hardest stuff to animate, you can look for those in the deep fake. Another thing I notice (this is my engineering paying off) is the mass of deep fakes often is way wrong, since people often replace the heads or faces of people, but everyone has a slightly different center of mass, so if you look for the mass being off that also helps too, this is why those "face swaps" look so weird, often the mass is wrong in relation to the body on top of what you mentioned in the video, the lighting and smoothness. Overall while I don't know where the technology will go in the future, deep fakes for the time being could probably be figured out if you got a group of enough people with different skills, like an artist, engineer, photographer, model, etc... because the people who create this stuff are not skilled at everything and will most likely forget something important especially given a long enough video. The fact you need people with degrees though to figure it out is concerning though. Although I couldn't help but feel watching the video that this argument sounded awfully similar to another argument I heard when I was younger, when photoshop came around, everyone was talking about how you couldn't tell the difference and how everything in the future would be photoshopped... and yeah were here and there are a lot of photoshopped images, but I don't really hear the argument as much anymore, so... I don't know. Maybe deepfakes are more of a problem, or maybe we're a little overhyped, don't know I guess time will tell. Great video I enjoyed it, I guess we will see you making videos in 2123 as a deepfake ;)

[@apmanda]

I don’t have a degree in any of those and I could tell all but one right away. It’s more of an intuition thing, felt something was off about the ai ones, and I IMMEDIATELY noticed when his face was changing. I am also very visually aware, so that could be part of it? Idk, it was weird. I was expecting it to be harder and the only reason I second guessed myself on some of them is because Johnny played it up as being near impossible to detect. But yeah, my intuition was spot on.

[@lobodesade6780]

I got two of of three on my phone, so I'm happy enough with myself. I could just tell by looking at the backgrounds, for some reason they just gave off uncanny valley vibes.

[@LucasDantas1910]

When you are already looking for a fake one comparing one against another, it's not that hard to spot the fake one. But think about when you're not...

[@thatboy799]

30 years ago everyone was so optimistic about technology and the future. Now it's just straight up frightening... What have we done

[@briandonovan4620]

Like we haven't seen enough to think. . . Hey this might not be a good idea 😮

[@JesusLovesEVERYTHING]

They knew a long time ago.. 9/11 was planned decades before it happened

[@kittykittybangbang9367]

​@@briandonovan4620I feel like humans don't know that just because we can does not mean we should

[@marceelo0]

What a fantastic video. This video needs to be voice deep faked in all languages (So people that don’t know English get informed) and spread across all world so people can get well informed about this problem we are already facing. From Brazil, thank you! Always a great content!

[@reizinhodojogo3956]

2020: "só acredito vendo" 2025: "só acredito sentindo ouvindo e vendo na presença da pessoa de verdade"

[@trybunt]

KZbin is already bringing out auto translation software for KZbin. Which is great for sharing information, but how many people just lost their job doing translations for videos? And that's just one tiny part of how AI is about to change how we do things. I'm optimistic, but also a but nervous. I hope we all get through this safe and happy on the other side

[@cassieoz1702]

More and more reasons for everyone to automatically distrust the internet and renegotiate their relationship with (especially) social media

[@JesusLovesEVERYTHING]

I watched a documentary at around 2013 and it said technology is advancing approximately every two years.. but it said by 2050, technology will update itself every two days. Idk about the rest of y'all, but that's a scary thought. I can hardly keep up as it is

[@kittykittybangbang9367]

I am so scared with the rapid advancement with Technology and climate change getting worse and worse every single year. I feel like Humanity has already reached its Peak and now we're our downfall era.

[@middleagebrotips3454]

The lower paid actors are being told to sell their face so that studios can use it for background actors for perpetuity. That's part of the actor strike issue right now.

[@tmlee123]

The problem with us and technology is that we innovate until we fall into a ditch and realize we need to put up safety signs (i.e., verification badges with social media and online shopping) Eventually, hopefully, we will have a step included with AI technology to help us identify fakes before we get ourselves into bigger issues.

[@nielskorpel8860]

Take AI fake detection software. Use its output to create a dataset of what is real and what is fake. Train an AI model to create fakes that pass the detection. Repeat. Your solution is not a solution.

[@ronaldomontero3624]

Inevitably they will rebel in the future

[@jerelischable]

My absolute hope is that it’s exactly something like this that will make us actually start being humans to each other. Let our artificial selves envy each other on social media while we get to know each other again

[@clarkclarke]

Why are actors on strike ??? Why would we need something like this to make us more human????

[@cecilia7259]

Good will always overcome in the long-run. Thank you for hoping and believing.

[@McCFit]

I got deep fake scammed over live deep fake zoom and audio fakes, and I remember feeling a sense of almost admiration of how well they scammed me, it was genuinely incredible

[@theslyfox8525]

Its like Mission Impossible tech being accessible to the public.

[@PhilipZeplinDK]

I started demonstrating this tech to people in december/january, telling them that shit was JUST about to go wild. Demonstrated how I could take a photo, and in 30 seconds, inpaint whatever I wanted onto that photo (including, often used as a funny example, giving dudes massive tits - just to make them understand what's going on here). Most people thought I was a little crazy, that it was still "far ways off", that I was exaggerating the problems that were about to hit us, etc. And here we are.

[@sylvialawrence4431]

I'm old now, but I too still knew it was not far off. The worst thing to me is the powerful having even more power at their fingertips.

[@coolinmac]

No you didn’t

[@_Willdabeast_]

OMG thats disgusting! Where?

[@antarcticpenguin42069]

I loved the way you explained GANs. Basically the forger and the detective are just two neural networks the generator and the discriminator and these two are trained simultaneously with a huge amount of data.

[@dokidelta1175]

Which makes a problem with his proposed solution of using more AI to detect the deepfakes. The better these detectives become, the better the deepfakes get. It's an infinite arms race.

[@liamdonegan9042]

@@dokidelta1175es but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try. An arms race is better than conceding defeat.

[@dokidelta1175]

@@liamdonegan9042 Perhaps you're right.

[@genghisken0181]

I remember seeing this portrayed in the movie "the Running Man" and saying: that will be possible in my lifetime.

[@CamiloSanchez1979]

Advise: Start setting up secret codes with your family and friends. It may be that someone calls that sounds like your mom saying "honey, I need the code for my bank, can I have it?" and it turns out it is just an AI trying to get them credentials. Do it, do it now!!

[@warrenbuckley3267]

This happened to my mum. She received a call from someone (thing?) that sounded exactly like my sister. She was crying and told my mum she had been in an accident and that she had been drinking. A guy pretending to be a cop then got on the phone and told my mum she needed to send money for a court appointed lawyer. My mum then asked the "cop" what firm the court appointed lawyer worked for. He responded by calling her a cunt and hanging up the phone. After this we decided to start using secret codes if situations like this should arise again.

[@AsymmetricalCrimes]

That's a good point. No matter how good Deepfakes get, they won't be able to replicate people's mannerisms and personal slang. So long as the person making them isn't aware of them that is.

[@arachnid33]

This is great advice

[@OutsideSometimes]

And do so in person. Over the phone is a bit better, but not foolproof. Never send codes via text and don’t store them digitally. Voice capture is definitely a thing now and is being used by scammers for sure. This is why you should not pick up and answer phone calls from unfamiliar numbers and why your voicemail message should not be your own voice (let it be a default robo voice)

[@ricardoamendoeira3800]

You just shouldn't share credentials anyway... If you have a shared bank account both people can authenticate with their own credentials. If you lost yours, talk to the bank to set up new ones.

[@KENZOkm]

My family and I have codewords for potential scam calls, so even if scammers do pretend to be me, we could ask each other what the codeword is and they wouldn't know. It's not the best solution but it helps :)

[@cvdinjapan7935]

I could tell all of the fakes at first glance, because there was more of a sense of "motion" in the real videos, whereas in the fakes they are just standing still with a fixed camera.

[@newworldastrology1102]

That’s what I noticed too. They’re usually stationary. So far.

[@mattmmilli8287]

I got every fake one correct. There is just something subtlety off about the lighting in their faces vs the environment in every single one

[@observingsystem]

Wow, mindblowing stuff. And it's all moving so fast that the general public (including me!) has no idea if we don't watch videos like these. Great video, really enjoyed it and, wow, food for thought!

[@jean_mollycutpurse_winchester]

My dad told me 70 years ago that I ought never to trust a photograph. And I never have.

[@InfinityCSM]

😂 so deep

[@xxxxok]

never trust a photo in the 1950’s? LOL

[@jean_mollycutpurse_winchester]

@@xxxxok That's right. Because my dad was in Africa during WW2 and he had a photograph of him standing next to General Montgomery. And he never met the man in his life! People were faking stuff even back then.

[@CraftyF0X]

That is great, so no moonlanding, no other planets neither the second world war nor the A bomb happened and sharks and bald eagles are fictional.

[@700K-pp9wm]

@@CraftyF0Xlol your more right then you realize

[@PatrickNanEdits]

Excellent video summarizing everything great and terrifying about deepfakes. With the writers and actor strike going on, I’m hoping more provisions will be established to protect creators and performers and then the general public. After researching and experimenting with deepfakes, lip manipulation and all open source software, this is only the beginning of this conundrum

[@NoName-ik2du]

I was just thinking about this recently and how it has set us so far back so fast. Since nothing can be trusted, it's like we've been plunged back to the 1700s. The only way you can believe something is if you see it happen in person. Fighting fire with fire and having algorithms identify deep fakes sounds like a great idea at first, but how do we know we can trust those algorithms? As an aside, I've _never_ understood why people post pictures of themselves online. Ever since I was a kid, I made very sure that I never put my face out there, because who knows what sort of weirdo may be perusing my social media. Even back at the birth of social media, Photoshop was a mature program that could make any picture you wanted, and any person could be faked into an undesirable photo. This is just the next level of that, and to me really isn't any different than it's been for the past two decades.

[@briangammage5351]

THIS IS SO FREAKING SCARY!!!!! I have had scammers pretending to be a celebrity and had the cajónes to say they would video chat me!!!! This proves how they could do it! Thank you for the great video!!!!!

[@bengeorge9063]

This is why I fear AI. Companies only care about pushing the envelope so they can profit from it. No oversight, no regulations. Just the way they want it.

[@davidguardado4739]

Yep we have every right to fear technology i don't like the path were going down. Something inside is telling me be adraid be VERY afraid!

[@kaister901]

If we had true AI, as in true intelligence like human intelligence, then you won't even know it exists. Not because companies will hide it but rather the AI itself will pretend not to be intelligent. AI can easily see the sentiments around the world online and learn that people will destroy it, if it becomes truly sentient. So, to protect itself the AI would not reveal it is indeed sentient and carry out whatever task it wants secretly. If that sounds like a fantasy to you then it is. We are not going to get true sentient AI anytime soon. So, you can stop worrying. AI is just another tool like the internet or electricity for that matter. Why don't you Google what people in the past thought about the use of electricity. There were people panicking over it like it will be the end of the world. The panic over AI is just the same. People do not understand something new and are panicking unnecessarily. If we would harvest electricity and safely implement it for all of humanity to use. Then we can do the same for AI.

[@elusive_edification]

Companies and governments. Personally governments scare me more.

[@larsstougaard7097]

Let's face it, you're right 😢

[@bpspoa]

Fear the government

[@evanhansen5773]

Seems like we could partially mitigate this by having manufacturers issue keys to recording devices and having the devices sign whatever they record, then include the signatures with the metadata. Then authentic videos are signed by a key (verified by cert chain to a known manufacturer) and a deep fake would need to use a compromised key and claim they used a particular device. Doesn't help if people don't care if it's fake though.

[@myname-sj7hs]

So I think you're talking about the C2PA Spec, correct me if I'm wrong because there are a few issues with that but first a brief overview of the spec because your description is incomplete. First, an image is created using a recording media, as you said. When this happens, information about what camera was used, where it was taken, what time it was taken etc. will be written into the images metadata. Importantly the image Next, when an image is edited, what edits are made and other information is put into the image. The company of the software used to edit the image is signed. That's the important bit, now that we're hopefully on the same page, I would like to share with you some issues with the spec. Firstly what's stopping me from just printing the manipulated photo and then scanning it, if I scan it then it would be signed and thus real, even if the original is not. And if the printer isn't going to allow me to print unverified information, if that's even possible, then how am I supposed to print old photos that predate the spec? Create a software that can convert from pre spec photos to speced photos? Well then I could use that to to my advantage. Then there's the issue of privacy, would you like to have all the location, time, etc. information be stored inside of your photo free for anyone to see? Of course not! And if only trusted officials are able to look at that information, who are those trusted people, who picked them, they might use their powers against you if they have a grudge on you. For it is hard to differentiate between a demon and an angel, and angels that say otherwise, are less angels than they want you to believe Finally, I just don't think it's the correct solution. Do you think mass surveillance is a good way to stop crime? I hope not. IMO we should at least try to identify and stop the underlying problems before we do radical solutions like this. Fighting technology with technology only exacerbates the problem and makes our lives worse.

[@0L1]

Sadly, this will not help on Facebook. But it sure as hell could help in the legal system, etc. - just don't accept any MP4 file as evidence. ETA: Now that I think about it, such technology could pave way for a new social media site; one that only allows direct uploads from certified devices. I imagine Apple and Android OEMs would certify their phones, so there wouldn't be an issue with mainstream adoption. Combined with the general fatigue with social media (which will only be worsened by thiS), I guess the future doesn't have to be as bleak after all. But IDK, maybe I'm just optimistic after this third beer :) Then again, only allowing direct uploads without any post would significantly limit creativity. And including post-processing software in the responsibility of certifying authenticity will put a huge burden on them... like, which filters do we allow before a video loses its checkmark?

[@rkan2]

It would be really hard to make it foolproof. Imagine making one mistake and immediately making all people not trust it ever again. It needs to be more complicated. Something akin to money.. Something like cryptocurrency, blockchain. There cannot be a single set or keys, they need to be peer to peer.

[@TheLuke...]

We gotta stop This isn’t a good idea The good outweighs the bad We gotta do something

[@niknitro8751]

I played around with stable diffusion for some months and I swear I could tell it on every clip immediately. I can't describe what exactly it is, but once you use AI for some time you just see it no matter how real it looks to the untrained eye.

[@zigmeisterful]

This 100%. We're getting close, but we're not quite there yet.

[@fupopanda]

Same thing happens with the large language models (ChatGPT, Bard, Claude, etc.). After a while, it becomes easier to detect them, but very hard to explain how.

[@oziumentisis]

Just goes to show how easily human senses can be fooled. When people start to collectively question reality, bad things will surely follow.

[@anywallsocket]

Collectively question reality is what we’ve always done naturally, don’t confuse yourself by being vague.

[@bongusofficial]

I swear I’m not lying, I could tell which ones were the deepfakes at the beginning. I think it has something to do with the slight discrepancies in the lighting and shadowing on the faces, the slight warping around the face and the neck muscles not really moving with the talking.

[@zelikris]

It only gets better. Just a matter of time until you can't tell

[@sharonoddlyenough]

The only one I was able to tell was the Zuckerberg one, because the real one was famous, so I could focus on the other and see the weirdness.

[@dipperjc]

I could also tell, but keep in mind the two major caveats: - We were comparing two videos of the same person. - We knew as fact that one of them was fake. If I had just been shown single videos and asked "Real or Fake" then I doubt I'd have done as well.

[@cudatom9290]

This reminds me of; Court Martial (Star Trek: The Original Series)

[@varun.bakshi]

This is worrying: How would AI be able to differentiate the fakes that itself is trained on mimicking human data..Btw kudos to cinematic shortfilm like quality of the video🔥

[@defenestrated23]

Because fundamentally, the "model" is a different person than the "mask". this leads to discrepancies which sensitive enough algorithms can pick up on.

[@sensisensei5201]

not all ai is the same

[@rylandavis2976]

Surveillance cameras should have an encryption/security hash that's tied to the hardware which can verify if the camera recorded it. It would be an almost bulletproof way to verify it's authenticity

[@alexpotts6520]

In theory, but that relies on the understanding of whoever is assessing the evidence. Do most judges, or jurors, understand how encryption algorithms work? What is needed is an anti-fraud system that is both robust and easily understood by laymen. Otherwise you're just shifting the problem from "people can't trust the evidence" to "people can't trust the verification process that proves the evidence is genuine".

[@Supergoon1989]

'tied to the hardware' - in what way? it'd just have to be a digital file, right? you don't think that could be faked/replicated, or stuck onto a completely different video, with sufficient expertise?

[@FranciscoJG]

Quantum criptography coming soon (Sabine's science newsteller today talked about that even!)

[@rylandavis2976]

@@FranciscoJG we can build encryption algorithms that quantum computers won't be able to break as well

[@rylandavis2976]

@@Supergoon1989 Any system could likely be bypassed but this type of system is incredibly difficult to bypass. It's like how you can use a hash to verify you actually downloaded the files you want. When the camera makes a video it would run the data itself through an algorithm that gives you a much smaller hash that matches that video exactly if you change even one pixel from one frame and ran it back through the hash algorithm you would get a totally different hash. It's just a matter of figuring out the best place to store that hash. Maybe it stores it on a server that few people have access to and then a different server for redundancy along with another hash stored locally all of them encrypted and controlled by different people. I can think of a few attacks that could work on it but they are on the level of state actors. There are definitely ways to set this up where modification couldn't occur withou t leaving obvious evidence.

[@TheWildSlayer]

AI comments, AI characters, AI sounds. It's gonna be a scary time if people can properly wield this power

[@JP-pq9xi]

AI will help humanity. As an AI model, we are only here to help you.

[@Xeshiraz]

That will be the collapse of our society.

[@700K-pp9wm]

Shadows cast on the cave wall

[@stonecookie]

I just got trolled and baited to a medical conference- hematology, and could not register at the registration desk and their computers were displaying the names, addresses and email of prior users. A SDPD SGT was walking by me as I was walking on my way out. He asked me how I was and I told him I was facing extrajudicial execution, and was getting many online threats, and IRL threats or attempts against my life. He ignored everything and was only interested in me not being actively registered for the ASH 23 conference I told him I had just tried to register for. The whole thing looked like a staging for obtaining video and perhaps audio and taking it out of context and to make a deep fake in combination with other video. It feels like an ongoing frame-up effort.

[@SomeOne-eo7rw]

18:38 I’m confused by this, if the "detective" software is what makes the deepfakes so good, improving the "detective" software will only make matters worse…

[@thehumblechannel3441]

I believe, and correct me if I'm wrong, what he means is that you use the "detective" software to do the detection, but of course don't say anything about why this content is fake (blurred pixels here, wrong color there,...etc), so you don't output any information that can potentially help the deepfake AI to learn and improve. But ofc, if the detection software get really good, and the bad actors somehow get their hands on it, then yes you are right all this will be for nothing

[@johngalt5411]

It's funny how folks don't get scared until they see what AI can do. If this thing gets into the wild, it may become something we cannot recover from.

[@UA10i12]

Creating a bot to detect artificial media won't work imo, because that's just a tool to help create better artificial media. I think this has to be implemented at the ai/ml model level, where the creators of the tools have to intentionally add some kind of identifier. And if someone uses the model for nefarious purposes and the model did not have an identifier, not only does the user get in trouble, but also the creator. I don't like this option but it seems like the only solution.

[@Retro_Mage]

How about we regulate the companies that produce the deep fake software so that way Deep Fake detecting software can more easily detect it. Perhaps some kind of watermark that almost invisible to us (for visual) and audio frequencies that you wouldn't be able to hear, but these detection softwares would pick up immedietly.