Fake historical proof, fake leaks, fake endorsments, fake ads ... People couldn't be bothered to double check when it was mere random text article on facetok, it's going to be so much worse ...
I’ve been telling my friends that 5-10 years from now, the only things that you’ll be able to ~100% trust is what happens in front of your eyes, in that very moment. You can elect to trust reliable news organizations to vet things for you, but even if you do, due to polarization a huge subset of the world will think you’ve been got and discard everything as fake.
Look at stuff like Sora, or all the new voice models coming out. Just a few days ago there was a high school athletic coach (!) arrested for cloning the principal’s voice using that to say vile stuff. He only got caught because he used his own e-mail.
Now combine that with the fact that Microsoft’s new Phi-mini model approaches GPT-3.5 performance using 3.8 billion parameters, whilst GPT-3.5 uses 175 billion. And we’re only ~5 years of optimization into this tech.
I want to get off Mr Bones’ wild ride.
5-10 years from now we may have vision pro gen 5, or whatever system achieves market dominance, between our eyes and what happens in front of us.
https://youtu.be/Z_ZGq8Tah0k?si=GuV1QC50jiv7yHP7
There's not a huge gap between that and a Westworld style infiltration-by-printed-robot.
(If you're thinking of the robots' brains in the TV show, sure, that's a totally different challenge; but you don't need them for a replacement-takeover scenario, there's a lot of other ways to do that).
Aside from entertainment, I don't understand this VR push when AR is arguably better for many of the non-entertainment uses
People where unable to see the face of the hacker. Instead they saw a smiley.
Everything in that series depicted is stuff that either exists today or will exist within 30 years. Everything.
The time is now. Even the mainstream news organizations are probably high 90s% reliable as they've been caught selectively editing, not vetting sources or facts, and displaying biases.
the ride never ends
We're in for a fun and wild ride.
Won't this just be a return to the historical norm?
Prior to photography being invented, there was no guarantee that any retelling of events (whether spoken, written or drawn) was true.
It will be weird for people alive today, but it doesn't seem that risky from a societal perspective.
I would wager we will see an improvement to society.
Seriously?
I cannot foretell how the risk of trust destruction from GenAI will unfold, but I'm optimistic our creativity will win out.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thou_shalt_not_bear_false_witn...
but instead they discuss who I've married. sigh.
anyhow: I share your optimism.
Sometimes I wish I could get an honest answer from trolls about what they hope to achieve, but of course that will never happen.
It's usually not that complicated: They enjoy provoking people, particularly people that can be reflexively upset by reading words. It's a game to them, against a party that they do not respect. The words they say might upset you, but the words ultimately mean nothing to them outside of provoking you, and the more chaotic they can make the situation the more amusing it is.
1. Spite/damage a community for perceived or effective injustice/discrimination. I remember this happening on Reddit and Stack Overflow circa 2010-2014.
2. Actually a neurodivergent person mistaken for a troll. I remember this happening on HN. Remember him being either schizophrenic or autistic. Another example might have been the creator of Temple OS.That's not the way. Be the change you want to see.
Before the internet, TV, radio, newspapers were our sources of truth beyond just trusting people in our immediate vicinity, and these were all heavily filtered by what stories they decided to run, the amount of detail they focused on, any human bias that crept into their reporting, etc. I'm not a "FAKE NEWS!!!" kind of guy, but one has always had to ingest news from these sources with some level of filtering in this regard, and understand that there might be other sides to the story, or whole stories of importance going unreported.
If we revert to subjecting images/video/audio clips to the same level of skepticism we had with random people informing us of pieces of news with no proof, then we're effectively just at the same level of objective universal truth as we had been for the overwhelming majority of human history.
I'm not arguing this is a good thing - just that it might have been a small and blissful island that some of us had the privilege of enjoying.
In courts of law, digital tapes have been frequently used as evidence.
The danger is in the court of public opinion where just having the conversation is damage enough. If you have to go out there and fight it then you give it even more visibility and it takes your focus and resources away from more useful activities. At the end of the day many people only remember the accusation, not what comes after.
Never a better time to learn the dichotomy of control. What is in your control is your thoughts and your actions. Outside of your control are: you body, your reputation, your wealth, you health, etc. It matters what you choose to do, but the outcomes are out of your control.
Now it's easy for everyone.
For AI, those AI move it to "someone with some dedication can do it" to "anyone with a computer can do it".
https://www.justice.gov/archives/jm/criminal-resource-manual...
Android and iOS should support real time voice changers as the norm with a quick switch button on the dialer to disable it and an option to have it off for known contacts.
I am talking about political. There has been a MASSIVE explosion of fakeness since covid, coupled with people who completely lost their ability to actually check information, and anything that makes it easier for anyone to propagate is dangerous in my view.
We've reached the point where "check by yourself / do your own research" moved from what the proponent of the truth used to tell people to go check, to what the other side is now using to give as much value to their facetok videos and whatnot (I am speaking in the general sense).
Thankfully you still can rely on fellow HN commenters like myself to bring you thoughts free of any mind binding manipulations and exempt of sarcasm.
The best part about this statement is it doesn’t even matter what “side” you are describing because all “sides” are subject to the same issue. Hell for more than a year every covid article from New York Times quoted an obscenely high 4% “death rate” despite it being off by multiple orders of magnitude. And if pressed they’d be able to easily “prove” their rate by citing some dodgy data model, using badly collected data, or just not understanding how to interpret the data. And that “truth” propagated by the NYT was cited all over causing all kinds of wildly over the top responses.
We live in a post truth world. You can always find some authoritative sounding source to support whatever it is you want to believe. There is always a way to massage the data and “facts” in a way that supports your claim as the “true truth”. It does even matter what “team” you are on… you’ll always be able to craft “the truth” by selectively using whatever source material you want.
I don’t even know how you’d solve this problem because it is a core issue with trust. It’s very, very hard to establish “knowledge trust” on something like the internet.
And while I was already super logical being a programmer and such, I don't even think that I like having did this, because now I am starting to lose the ability to "posit" or believe something is true, because one can always argue that so many things are subjective that it is impossible to come to an agreement on something in any reasonable amount of time.
I think it's just a lack of imagination, we can do this funny offensive misleading thing right now, it can surely be used in other ways but you'd have to let your mind wonder for one extra moment after your social media induced reaction fixation episode. This could be depression hack to hear your own voice in different accents motivate you.
We're at the point now where, for example, a leak of phone number + address book would enable a high quality, large scale automated impersonation pipeline that many here could put together in a weekend.
Install a compromised app (or just be a once-user of a newly-compromised app), then answer the phone for a minute and then everyone you know receives a somewhat believable phonecall to empty their wallets / your accounts?
“Because Martian sucks and doesn’t have bleep blorps.”
The fact is that everyone gets taken for a ride at least once. Many people never admit it to themselves, but we have all been or will be taken advantage of. Some of us end up devastated by it or are an 'eternal mark', but the vast majority of us just learn a lesson.
What happens to society when trust becomes risky to the point that everything could be a ruse by a bad actor? It ends up doing what it always does in that situation -- authoritarian regimes can be looked at for examples of what will happen: people will rally around family and extremely close friends, and close off all vulnerability and vastly decrease their tolerance for risk around everyone else, unless they have no other choice.
I haven't heard someone snarkily say "it's on the internet so it must be true" in like 12 years. Let's bring that back.
I mean there are existing laws that would apply, there are laws against scamming or whatever bad stuff you can do with this. The world might need a law though to force media to label AI generated content and IMO a law where media and users would take responsability for their content.
What I mean if say as a random user I claim something in a media post like "eating shit cures you by covid" I should either be forced to add "btw I am not taking any respectability for my comment and I am not a medic/lawyer/expert" otherwise I should be forced to pay damages is someone sues me for my bullshit claims.
So cloning voices should be legal, sscamming people is illegal.