Our basic assumptions about photos capturing reality are about to go up in smoke. - eviltoast
  • umami_wasabi@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    4 months ago

    Photos are never a concrete representation of the reality. Photos are being pre-processed by image processor already and we also got Photoshop. One can even fake a film based photo if he knows what to do. The proliferation of image generation models and impainting models make the access easier but image manipulation tools always exist.

    • Kidplayer_666@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      30
      ·
      4 months ago

      The thing is, faking them went from a State can do it, to a professional can do it, an experienced amateur can do it, to absolutely everyone can

      • Bitrot@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        24
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        I think this is the crux of the article. In the past most people have considered photographic evidence to be very convincing. Sure, you could be removed from a photo of Stalin, and later people could do photoshop (with varying realism), now it’s a few words to make changes that many people believe without hesitation. Soon it will happen to video too, very soon.

        Most people are not ready for it. Even shitty AI photos on social media get huge reactions with barely a handful calling them out.

      • teawrecks@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        4 months ago

        I remember in the UK show Utopia from 2013, a government frames one of the characters for a school shooting by perfectly doctoring security footage to erase the actual hired shooter and replace them with a specific kid. And they do it all in a matter of hours. I remember thinking that tech was unrealistic, probably impossible. The best Hollywood VFX experts would need a week or more to make it that believable, and even they would need a ton of reference of both the kid and the lightning. Purely fantastical tech.

        And now, here we are…

        • Kache@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          There’s the practical distinction between “everyone can do it with some dedicated intent” (so very few actually bother) vs everyone can do it on a whim"

          • arglebargle@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            4 months ago

            Admittedly a computer in everyone’s hand is new. But corel paint, for example, was 12 years old in 2003. People were basically making memes and creating scenes that never existed on a whim and for the lulz back then.

            And were much, much, better then these stupid examples!

    • Scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      4 months ago

      Agree. Now I will say when faced with the decision between ethical issues vs profits big tech smashed that profits button without beating an eye, but the tools were always going to be made. It’s just too bad they didn’t stop for 5 seconds to think about how they could be mitigated.

  • FiniteBanjo@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    4 months ago

    In the thumbnail is the Tiananmen Square Tank Man.

    Are you claiming a globally televised event which lead to a complete breakdown of trade relations across the world in the 90s, didn’t happen?

  • Chamomile 🐑@furry.engineer
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    @Gaywallet I have a couple thoughts on this:

    1. This seems like a way that device attestation could worm its way further into our devices. Right now Google is trying to watermark AI-generated photos as AI, but you could easily go the other way - if a photo hasn’t been manipulated, it’s signed with a key that is locked down to device attestation. What, your phone is rooted? That’s kinda suspicious - how am I supposed to know your photos are real?

    2. Short of that, though, I suspect that the most likely consequence of this is the videos will start being increasingly seen as necessary for true proof, since those are harder to fake - for now, at least. And of course, there will be a lot more misinformation on the internet, especially in the short term while awareness of this catches up.

  • arglebargle@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    4 months ago

    Those examples are so bad. You do not need AI to do any of those. That’s just cut and paste.

    Hell, we have had fake reality video overlays that are better than that on our phones for over a decade.

  • kbal@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    4 months ago

    I don’t think many people would go so far as to consider photographs “the linchpin of social consensus” but even so, many of the assumptions we tend to make about them have always been false ones. I’ve seen things in real life that later featured on the front page of newspapers. The difference can be more stark than is often appreciated. Like any powerful medium of expression they can capture truth or they can obscure it.