172
The World’s Leading Deepfake Expert No Longer Trusts His Own Eyes (www.nytimes.com)
submitted 4 months ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
28 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 1 point 4 months ago (7 children)

It’s a hard problem, but there is likely a way with cryptography and upload to server that would be verifiable. Honestly this may be the only legitimate use of blockchain.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (6 children)

    It would require a centralized authority to work in any meaningful way.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    Not true. This is something I had researched in the early days. If you can store a crypto hash of the document on a Blockchain, you can upload said document anywhere you want for people to DL. The hashes will always match, and you can use the timestamp of the Blockchain entry as reference to veracity. This could be done via an open source project and should the maintainers fall off the map, some one can always fork.

    I remember seeing this listed as something like "proof of existence".

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (1 child)

    It just means the file existed at the time. I guess that's useful to an extent. Maybe bodycams could upload hashes of 1 second segments of video & audio delay but it's ± limited to that.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago

    You can hash the entire video. It would be very, very difficult (impossible?) to create another video with a hash collision that changed even a couple pixels from the original hash. You just need the hash computed from that unaltered video uploaded at time of encoding to the blockchain. It doesn’t change that someone could have created an entire AI video and uploaded it to the same proof of existence, but it does mean you could verify that a given video was observed on the blockchain at time x, and that it has not been altered in some way. Time of video creation would also be included in the hash (and metadata) so that you could verify that the video was created, by what program, at what time; and you’d have (ideally a less than 5s later) time stamp of it being verified on the blockchain.

    There’s likely a better way to do this as well using zero knowledge proofs and/or homomorphic encryption but there probably exists a way to do this which would be tractable.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    Not really

    You can publish public keys and sign the videos with private keys

    It still doesn't prove the video is not AI, just that it comes from a specific source, like a press camera

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (1 child)

    You can always retroactively sign. Or it would require secretive hardware managed by some centralized authority, and would be exploitable by at least nation state actors.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago

    Signing it doesn't mean "not modified", it means "yes, this video is from that person", basically, nothing more. However, that signature is something that can't be faked.

    At least with that you can state that a video came from a journalist themselves. If that's enough to trust it, is another question

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent