
I create fake videos. Here’s why people even believe the obvious ones - Vaslo
https://www.fastcompany.com/90404007/i-create-fake-videos-heres-why-people-believe-even-the-obvious-ones
======
ZeroGravitas
This stuff is like spam but worse.

It's like if someone else could send your money to a Nigerian prince, so you
can't just defend yourself, you need to defend everyone, even the people who
believe the prince and think you're trying to stop then getting rich.

------
duskhacker
> That fear is founded on the longstanding principle that seeing is believing.
> But it seems as though that old axiom may not be true anymore

This was never true.

First, one is not “seeing” a thing when it is witnessed through a medium. One
is witnessing a representation, not the thing. Seeing in the axiom above
means, for lack of a better term, “eyeballing”.

Further, any magician will tell you that eyeballing something doesn’t mean
you’re seeing what you think you’re seeing.

I have a hard time relating to this whole “omg, deep fakes horrible” thing,
I’m in my 50’s and I relate to the author’s son’s outlook more closely.

I have a counter to that axiom from modified old country wisdom: “Don’t
believe anything you hear and only half of what you eyeball”

------
ssivark
Better to link to the original source: [https://theconversation.com/i-create-
manipulated-images-and-...](https://theconversation.com/i-create-manipulated-
images-and-videos-but-quality-may-not-matter-much-120404)

------
cbanek
> But we’ve found that a key element of the battle between truth and
> propaganda has nothing to do with technology. It has to do with how people
> are much more likely to accept something if it confirms their beliefs.

So true (and not just because I believed this before I read it).

------
ionwake
Any github repos so I can have a play?

------
kaushikt
This is horrible. Are they news providers who call on these fake or say
altered videos validating the source and truth?

~~~
casion
The problem is the chain of truth. Maybe you can prove that someone said
something, but not that they believe it or even if it's objectively true.

Then you have disputes of validation. A party wanting to retract reality can
present their own convincing fake and chain of custody of validation. It only
take a few smart attacks on a central validator for the "attacker" to seed
reasonable doubt.

The real solution is to trust nothing and always be ready to admit that you
may be incorrect (given sufficient rational evidence to your contrary).

~~~
sjiiehwba873
But thats what some of the bad actors want. For you to trust nothing. So even
when you see real news, which portrays them in a bad light, you won't believe
it.

We need to put our trust in something. But be careful about what we trust. And
always be prepared to change our minds when were proven wrong.

