Hacker News Reader

Well, in this case, they would be correct.

Finding a reliable way to exchange trusted information is a central problem of our time.

There's already an outbreak of "fakes" by the simple technique of misleading editing:

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/corbyn-ira-vi...

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/tories-release-anothe...

And it doesn't even have to be sophisticated editing. Slowing down a video of a person speaking is enough to fool a lot of viewers into thinking that person is drunk:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2019/05/23/faked-p...

Is there any reason it should be a worse problem for video than it's been for print over the last 20 years?

"I saw it with my own eyes" is inherently more convincing than "someone told me [in writing] how it is". It will be naturally harder for humans to reject false recordings as deceitful.

And one wonders how muddied the waters will become, actual videos may be discarded on accusation of being deepfakes!

I imagine that future society will develop some system of "truth certification"; networks distributing "seals of approval / authenticity".

It may become a very different world psychologically - just like the medieval people would be psychologically, largely incomprehensible to us.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com