Big Data, Big Money, Big Right-Wing Propaganda Machine
- Thread starter annabenedetti
- Start date
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
Is this your way of working around your sudden realization that Hillary's campaign would have actually had to benefit from the Canadians' car rentals and meal purchases for your argument to have any merit?
You wanted discussion, I gave you discussion. How's it working out for you?
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
Last edited:
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
don't you go getting yourself banned again! :sibbie:
I'm starting to get used to it.
Every time that... ummm...
Every time people who have sworn off TOL show up, I figure... :idunno:
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
This viral Schwarzenegger deepfake isn't just entertaining. It's a warning.
View attachment 26799
A still from a deepfake video in which Bill Hader slowly transforms into Arnold Schwarzenegger.
By Ben Collins
The video starts like dozens of others on YouTube — with former “Saturday Night Live” star Bill Hader offering up a celebrity impression, this time of Arnold Schwarzenegger.
The impression is spot-on, but that’s not why the video has almost 6 million views in the last month. About ten seconds into the video, Hader’s face slowly, almost imperceptibly starts to morph into Schwarzenegger’s face. The full transformation takes about six seconds, but the changes are so subtle that it seems like magic. Suddenly, it looks like Schwarzenegger, albeit a skinnier version, is doing an impression of himself.
The video quickly became one of YouTube’s most watched deepfake videos, a burgeoning genre of content on the internet that uses powerful — and often free — software to create extremely lifelike videos of people saying just about anything.
The emergence of these videos has led to growing concern that they could be used to spread a new, powerful form of misinformation ahead of the 2020 elections. Videos of politicians could be easily manipulated to portray them as saying things they never really said. But the Hader-Schwarzenegger video, along with other celebrity-based videos, have become a sort of test run and public service announcement, heightening public awareness of deepfake technology and also making sure some deepfakes have trouble getting monetized.
With the Bill Hader video, half of the people who comment don’t know it’s modified,” said Tom, a graphic illustrator from the Czech Republic who created the video, and who asked that NBC News not use his last name out of privacy concerns. Tom was the first to post the video to Reddit and YouTube and sent over examples of his data set and process for making deepfakes.
“We need for people to know what’s possible, and to think before they believe,” he said.
On Thursday, the House Intelligence Committee will hold a hearing to examine what it calls “the national security threats posed by AI-enabled fake content, what can be done to detect and combat it, and what role the public sector, the private sector, and society as a whole should play to counter a potentially grim, ‘post-truth’ future.”
Less-convincing manipulated videos have taken over the news in recent weeks, notably one that slowed down Nancy Pelosi’s voice to falsely portray her as having trouble speaking. On Tuesday, a deepfake of Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg that was posted to Instagram gained attention as part of an art project.
Tom made the Hader-Schwarzenegger video last month, in part to learn more about machine learning and artificial intelligence. His job involves doing 3D scanning for movies and video games, which he says “may sound like the same thing, but are not the same at all.”
The Schwarzenegger video took Tom a couple of days to create and didn’t cost him a penny. He uses free, open-source software called DeepFaceLab and learned how to meld faces using tutorials online.
“This one was actually the easiest to do,” he said. “It’s an interview. There are two camera angles. They’re using the same light. It was easier.”
While the software to make deepfakes is not hard to acquire, Tom said there are other barriers for creation of fake videos, including the need for powerful computer rigs and a deep dataset of pictures for each celebrity, shot from all angles.
“It’s a good thing that not everyone can do it,” Tom said. “People on the internet are animals, and they might use it for not very good stuff.”
. . . .
But Tom added that he hopes deepfakes aren’t entirely banned.
“When you take photography, Photoshop existed for over a decade,” he said. “We didn’t ban Photoshop because you can do malicious stuff with it. It’s mostly used positively. What’s important is that people are more cautious, just like with some sensationalistic photos that have been in the news.”
View attachment 26799
A still from a deepfake video in which Bill Hader slowly transforms into Arnold Schwarzenegger.
By Ben Collins
The video starts like dozens of others on YouTube — with former “Saturday Night Live” star Bill Hader offering up a celebrity impression, this time of Arnold Schwarzenegger.
The impression is spot-on, but that’s not why the video has almost 6 million views in the last month. About ten seconds into the video, Hader’s face slowly, almost imperceptibly starts to morph into Schwarzenegger’s face. The full transformation takes about six seconds, but the changes are so subtle that it seems like magic. Suddenly, it looks like Schwarzenegger, albeit a skinnier version, is doing an impression of himself.
The video quickly became one of YouTube’s most watched deepfake videos, a burgeoning genre of content on the internet that uses powerful — and often free — software to create extremely lifelike videos of people saying just about anything.
The emergence of these videos has led to growing concern that they could be used to spread a new, powerful form of misinformation ahead of the 2020 elections. Videos of politicians could be easily manipulated to portray them as saying things they never really said. But the Hader-Schwarzenegger video, along with other celebrity-based videos, have become a sort of test run and public service announcement, heightening public awareness of deepfake technology and also making sure some deepfakes have trouble getting monetized.
With the Bill Hader video, half of the people who comment don’t know it’s modified,” said Tom, a graphic illustrator from the Czech Republic who created the video, and who asked that NBC News not use his last name out of privacy concerns. Tom was the first to post the video to Reddit and YouTube and sent over examples of his data set and process for making deepfakes.
“We need for people to know what’s possible, and to think before they believe,” he said.
On Thursday, the House Intelligence Committee will hold a hearing to examine what it calls “the national security threats posed by AI-enabled fake content, what can be done to detect and combat it, and what role the public sector, the private sector, and society as a whole should play to counter a potentially grim, ‘post-truth’ future.”
Less-convincing manipulated videos have taken over the news in recent weeks, notably one that slowed down Nancy Pelosi’s voice to falsely portray her as having trouble speaking. On Tuesday, a deepfake of Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg that was posted to Instagram gained attention as part of an art project.
Tom made the Hader-Schwarzenegger video last month, in part to learn more about machine learning and artificial intelligence. His job involves doing 3D scanning for movies and video games, which he says “may sound like the same thing, but are not the same at all.”
The Schwarzenegger video took Tom a couple of days to create and didn’t cost him a penny. He uses free, open-source software called DeepFaceLab and learned how to meld faces using tutorials online.
“This one was actually the easiest to do,” he said. “It’s an interview. There are two camera angles. They’re using the same light. It was easier.”
While the software to make deepfakes is not hard to acquire, Tom said there are other barriers for creation of fake videos, including the need for powerful computer rigs and a deep dataset of pictures for each celebrity, shot from all angles.
“It’s a good thing that not everyone can do it,” Tom said. “People on the internet are animals, and they might use it for not very good stuff.”
. . . .
But Tom added that he hopes deepfakes aren’t entirely banned.
“When you take photography, Photoshop existed for over a decade,” he said. “We didn’t ban Photoshop because you can do malicious stuff with it. It’s mostly used positively. What’s important is that people are more cautious, just like with some sensationalistic photos that have been in the news.”
The Berean
Well-known member
I don't understand what is up with all the fearing mongering? If large group of people can be so easily fooled and made to "change their minds" then that speaks more about them than the technology. Lack of education and the lack of critical thinking are the core issues. If people are scared of this then the simple solution is to simply get off social media and the Internet completely. There, you see, an easy solution. Human society has been around for thousands of years. The Internet has been around for about 25 years. People got along fine without the Internet. They'll be fine when the Internet is gone one day. As a general rule I am very distrustful of any supposed "news" on the Internet so I'm not worried that some faceless person with a computer algorithm can make me "change my mind".
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
Labeling it as "fear-mongering" is an attempt to discredit the information provided, when it's actually good information for all of us to know. I intentionally included the end of the article which makes it clear this isn't easy to do, and that the person who made the video isn't looking to see the technology banned.
Did you read that half the commenters didn't seem to realize the video was modified? Extrapolate that out to the right-wing who were fooled (willfully or not is debatable) by the Pelosi video, and what can happen in the future as the technology continues to expand?
Of course. Knowing that - and saying that - doesn't discount the lesson which can be learned here, hopefully, by people who might be inclined to believe a doctored video particularly if it fits their preconceived beliefs. After all, what does the article provide? Education.
Who said that? That's you talking, trying to drive the narrative.
Good luck with that.
lain:I see your view as short-sighted. The internet will evolve as it will evolve, but you can't put it back in the box and force a global Luddite. To be aware, to be armed with practical knowledge (particularly for the older generation, which happens to be our largest voting block, yet not as technologically savvy as they could be, as evidenced by the 'real' fake news they shared with abandon during the 2016 election) is a good thing.
The Berean
Well-known member
My "fear-mongering" comment is not about the technology itself but about how you are trying to make it into some "sky is falling" scenario. You started this thread to talk about how "dangerous" this technology is. Why is it dangerous? People cannot brainwashed. That only happens in movies. If people believe everything they read and see on the Internet that is their own silly fault. The world is always in conflict especially in politics. That's not new. Fake news has always been around. A hundred years ago it was called "yellow journalism"
So what? Again, if people are fooled by stuff on the Internet then that is on them. I don't really care. I'm a professional engineer with several engineering degrees. I work with technology every day. I simply don't see what the big deal is about this face changing video. I'm not worried at all.
This entire thread is about you trying drumming up fear and concern of some piece of software. Why are you so concerned?
Good luck with what? If you had to, you could not stop using social media?Good luck with that.
How is it short sighted? You seem to place way too much emphasis on technology and it's importance. Our modern technological society may not last forever. Human history has shown over and over that societies, cultures, empires, etc. all eventually decline and are replaced. It's not too hard to imagine the decline of the modern technological world. A major global catastrophe or global nuclear war or global pandemic can potentially bring down the entire world. Shoot, a powerful EMP weapon could destroy the majority of electronics.
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
It was very clear what you meant: you want to discredit a free and open discussion by a graphic illustrator who understands how digital manipulation works and its ramification, and wants to share what he's learned. You're not interested? Fine. Ignore the information. Others may benefit.
I started this thread to talk about Robert Mercer and Cambridge Analytica. Apparently you're a little out of the loop.
You call it brainwashed. Psychologists and behavioral scientists have different terminology, you might be interested in exploring that sometime. Oh, that's right, you're already 'educated and a critical thinker' and an engineer who apparently has no interest in how humans interact with their social environment.
Straw man.
Why does this have you so tied up in knots, I wonder?
Again, I think you're out of the loop on this thread. That's okay. If you ever want to read through it, be my guest. That's why it's here, because I want people to be informed about what affects us.
:freak: I can and I have. Good luck getting a global detox, which is what you'd need to have happen for your idea to have legs. I'm saying there's no going back. I'm surprised you don't understand that.
You seem to toss off as unimportant anything you don't personally ordain as important. Why are you so concerned about whether a conversation like this takes place? Don't you hope that people won't be taken in by what they think they're seeing?
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
perhaps this will be a spur toward reigning in universal suffrage and restricting the vote to those who demonstrate the capacity to vote wisely
Correct....as the old-guard passes on.
As such, conservatism will always be on the losing end of progression.