With deep fake video and audio you can be placed at the scene of a crime.... with modern mail-in DNA databases it's only a small step away from replicating and planting your DNA... the next 50 years are going to be very interesting. We have essentially reached a point where we cannot trust even our own eyes and ears.
@@SquishyMan9919 people are also not seeing the rest of the bad, historical reminders of the past are being removed, school is going to be strictly online instead of put of books and now they can make any former leader or really anyone in history say whatever they want. Those who control the present control the past and the who control the past controls the future. This is all a way of but ing books without burning books.
To me, the sound was obviously fake, or did they change that on purpose for this video so that no one can copy it? Nixons voice sounds very robotic. Especially the sharp sound of male voices recorded in that era is softened.
I'd like to see a deepfake done of HM Queen delivering her prewritten speech in the aftermath of a nuclear war circa 1983-84. A Christmas speech from that time could be used as the video base.
And this is exactly why I've stepped away from the "news" and media for the past 4 years. One of the best decisions in terms of my overall all mental state and happiness. I highly suggest!
Nixon's "deepfake" head moves in a peculiar way, bobbing during silent moments. Even someone unfamiliar with Nixon would probably find that strange and start wondering if it's genuine.
Congrats to the MIT team for their (unsettling) achievement. But this is "doing it the hard way." The easy way is to simply show video segments that mislead viewers. By starting and stopping at opportune moments, viewers can be fooled into believing something very different from what they would believe if they saw the event (a speech, an interaction, etc) from start to finish.
I remember seeing a video demonstrating this technique. very unsettling. the video style is used a lot in commercials, and I now cringe every time I see it.
Yes, simple 'editing' goes a long way. It's the traditional media manipulation method. Been used for many decades in television and in print to bend and distort the public's understanding of facts. Simple omission of key details changes the perceived 'truth.'
@@PrimeSuperboy not judging dude for a mispronunciation, but heavily judging everyone else in the room for not giving him another take so he doesnt undermine his own authority by appearing not to know the relevant vocab. At the very least the editor should have cut around it, right? (Also, thank you for "cromulent".)
First , for this to have took 6months is crazy. We could have pulled off one of this level in a day to 2 days. the start is like a cheap movie...smh come on ....you could run this and in know it was fake in 10mins
Or just crosscheck information from various independent primary sources? Unfortunately, most Western media outlets simply seem to echo sources like Reuters, without attempting to verify the information. Thus, you end up with no more than one primary source.
I think that's a fallacy. We're never going back to that time when journalists and editors were the gatekeepers of our information. Soon, these deepfakes will progress to a level that we can't recognize them. However, there is already software that can detect deepfake markers. This software will probably progress alongside the deepfake technology, and soon we will all have a browser extension that flags deepfake markers.
Hey the conspiracy theorists were right! We didn't go to the moon...this must have been a video they made before they changed the script for the moon landing.
Wow, this was really, really primitive.... This clip would not have fooled anyone as being real even back in the summer of 1969. How much do the folks going to MIT pay in annual tuition? THAT much? Ouch.
I remember 1969. I was 9 years old. I was following the space program closely. It would've fooled me. It would've fooled my parents' generation even more readily. They were so trusting of media and authority back then. They had no reason not to believe what they saw on the news. My brother and I, as kids used to laugh at how trusting and almost gullible they were at times. We're allegedly more sophisticated now, so people believe, because we walk around with smartphones in our hands and we keep up on all the tech trends etc, blah, blah, blah. Witnessing events unfold around social media the past few years has left me feeling disgusted and horrified. Large swaths of the population appear to be very easily led and ready to believe anything you tell them, provided it's sensational, provocative and triggers some kind of an endorphin reaction in them when sharing whatever juicy tidbits they found on social media. We're moving into a time where nobody is going to be able to trust what they see in the news, especially when so many seem to gather their information from social media and other dubious sources.
The video claims upside vs downside. Do you think whatever potential upside you perceive with fake videos is equal to or greater than the potential downside that is obvious? Fake birthday cards versus potential nucelar war? I'm just asking what you see the upside to be that is worth the risk of expanding this technology?
Both intriguing and distirbing at the same time.
With deep fake video and audio you can be placed at the scene of a crime.... with modern mail-in DNA databases it's only a small step away from replicating and planting your DNA... the next 50 years are going to be very interesting. We have essentially reached a point where we cannot trust even our own eyes and ears.
@@SquishyMan9919 people are also not seeing the rest of the bad, historical reminders of the past are being removed, school is going to be strictly online instead of put of books and now they can make any former leader or really anyone in history say whatever they want. Those who control the present control the past and the who control the past controls the future. This is all a way of but ing books without burning books.
Our whole entire existence is about to change. Could be very scary times
To me, the sound was obviously fake, or did they change that on purpose for this video so that no one can copy it?
Nixons voice sounds very robotic. Especially the sharp sound of male voices recorded in that era is softened.
Technology improves very quickly and some people will soon be able to make extremely accurate deep fakes, which I think is scary...
they should have used an impersonator. they used AI to convert an actors voice. but tech improves quickly
It won't be long
That speech by Hank McCoy at the end was really quite something.
Uhhh. I feel like this will be more destructive than creative. Might quite literally be a "nuke" for the internet.
Definitely correct
"your eyes didn't see it, but your brain did."
-mr. Plinkett
Watching the future of our history.
I'd like to see a deepfake done of HM Queen delivering her prewritten speech in the aftermath of a nuclear war circa 1983-84. A Christmas speech from that time could be used as the video base.
Yes. Operation Able Archer. ..Ooooh sh***t!!
And yet it has only been used for memes.
Sounds really robotic, should've got Billy West
Ahhhhhroooooo!!!
And this is exactly why I've stepped away from the "news" and media for the past 4 years. One of the best decisions in terms of my overall all mental state and happiness. I highly suggest!
Modern news media is about as bad for us as smoking.
Nixon's "deepfake" head moves in a peculiar way, bobbing during silent moments. Even someone unfamiliar with Nixon would probably find that strange and start wondering if it's genuine.
I fear a deepfake of the My Pillow guy making this exact speech.
They need to use this tech for For All Mankind on appletv. Or for the Mandela Effect
Easy to spot the flaws in Nixon mouth!
But that’s with the prerequisite that we know it’s a deep fake..
Congrats to the MIT team for their (unsettling) achievement. But this is "doing it the hard way." The easy way is to simply show video segments that mislead viewers. By starting and stopping at opportune moments, viewers can be fooled into believing something very different from what they would believe if they saw the event (a speech, an interaction, etc) from start to finish.
I remember seeing a video demonstrating this technique. very unsettling. the video style is used a lot in commercials, and I now cringe every time I see it.
Yes, simple 'editing' goes a long way. It's the traditional media manipulation method. Been used for many decades in television and in print to bend and distort the public's understanding of facts. Simple omission of key details changes the perceived 'truth.'
Only *one* of the dystopian horrors is to come.
Why is she saying "women, you know... Marginalized people"? In which sense are women marginalized in our society?
If you are not afraid then you are asleep at the wheel. Be very afraid and wake up.
Then there are the movies Interstellar and Transformers Dark Side of the Moon.
I've been familiar with deepfakes for a couple years. Now i know they use it for pornography. thx, SA!
Nobody at SA is going to let that guy know that "simulcrum" is not a word? Cold.
It's a perfectly cromulent word
@@PrimeSuperboy not judging dude for a mispronunciation, but heavily judging everyone else in the room for not giving him another take so he doesnt undermine his own authority by appearing not to know the relevant vocab. At the very least the editor should have cut around it, right? (Also, thank you for "cromulent".)
First , for this to have took 6months is crazy. We could have pulled off one of this level in a day to 2 days. the start is like a cheap movie...smh come on ....you could run this and in know it was fake in 10mins
use it kindly
It will become really important to watch information throught reliable and reputable channels.
I'd trust you before I'd trust the current media
So not CNN
Or just crosscheck information from various independent primary sources?
Unfortunately, most Western media outlets simply seem to echo sources like Reuters, without attempting to verify the information. Thus, you end up with no more than one primary source.
I think that's a fallacy. We're never going back to that time when journalists and editors were the gatekeepers of our information. Soon, these deepfakes will progress to a level that we can't recognize them. However, there is already software that can detect deepfake markers. This software will probably progress alongside the deepfake technology, and soon we will all have a browser extension that flags deepfake markers.
Hey this was posted on my birthday :)
who told you that it's a good idea to add effects to text? they caused me eyestrain
The first one wasn't fake
Trump is the Messiah.
@@jamescook6477 lolllllllll
It sure is easy to fool people.
Wasn’t convincing.
Of all the great speaches why do this? Just gives credence to the hoax
Hey the conspiracy theorists were right! We didn't go to the moon...this must have been a video they made before they changed the script for the moon landing.
Wow, this was really, really primitive.... This clip would not have fooled anyone as being real even back in the summer of 1969. How much do the folks going to MIT pay in annual tuition? THAT much? Ouch.
I remember 1969. I was 9 years old. I was following the space program closely. It would've fooled me. It would've fooled my parents' generation even more readily. They were so trusting of media and authority back then. They had no reason not to believe what they saw on the news. My brother and I, as kids used to laugh at how trusting and almost gullible they were at times.
We're allegedly more sophisticated now, so people believe, because we walk around with smartphones in our hands and we keep up on all the tech trends etc, blah, blah, blah. Witnessing events unfold around social media the past few years has left me feeling disgusted and horrified. Large swaths of the population appear to be very easily led and ready to believe anything you tell them, provided it's sensational, provocative and triggers some kind of an endorphin reaction in them when sharing whatever juicy tidbits they found on social media. We're moving into a time where nobody is going to be able to trust what they see in the news, especially when so many seem to gather their information from social media and other dubious sources.
I loved every bit of this ❤️
So, when is MIT going to look into the inconsistencies in the 911, JFK assassination, & moon landing footage?
This is the scariest thing I've ever seen online. The future doesn't look good
🤦
Be afraid..be very afraid...our future is here
You really think that sounded like him?
👍👍👍
кучка толстых людей жаждет быть обманутыми. интересно...
Haha! They don't even know they're being deceived...
2nd
The video claims upside vs downside. Do you think whatever potential upside you perceive with fake videos is equal to or greater than the potential downside that is obvious? Fake birthday cards versus potential nucelar war? I'm just asking what you see the upside to be that is worth the risk of expanding this technology?
What do you propose to do to stop it? Make it illegal? If so, are you comfortable with removing freedom of speech?