Vitalik Buterin
@vitalik.eth
One way to look at the possible effects of deepfakes in politics is to look at "shallow fakes" that have been possible for a long time. For example, this screenshot purporting to be a "you're free to say whatever nasty stuff you want" whitelist for twitter. I actually have no idea if this is real or fake, but there definitely are some people who are treating it as real, imo without sufficient evidence. And yet, the effects of things like this are pretty bounded. This feels like a plausible outcome for deepfakes in politics. The smart people know not to trust a politician's statements without confirmation on official channels, and less smart people get tricked, as they do today with shallow fakes. If something fake goes viral, Community Notes can help on the margin in making it clear that it's fake. Most normies don't actually look at this stuff in real time, and so the effect ends up not too bad. This is the strongest case for not being too worried. The place where I am *more* worried about deepfakes is...
53 replies
297 recasts
1290 reactions
shwrz
@shwrz
I disagree on some of your points. Yes smart people tend to wait for verification but with more fakes that can be realer (video, sound on top of text) it pushes you into defensive - don’t trust anything. It takes away much needed participation bcs the default is don’t engage = waste of energy. Also, even if a post is later debunked the damage is already done and the cost to do so is usually worth it. See edited, apology newspaper articles etc The noise to signal ratio will become too high without some curated/verification solution. I could see this as a 4chan vs Newspaper scenario. Everything on the net as it is will be considered as fake by default = 4chan and a new trusted/verified channel, w/e thats going to be will be the new “newspaper”. Hope that makes sense.
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
