2233
Benefit of the hindsight (sub.wetshaving.social)
submitted 1 year ago by to c/memes@lemmy.world
193 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

Did you reply to the wrong comment?

The problem is “misinformation” and has been since before nft/genai became a thing.

Gen Ai makes misinformation worse but the event that sparked this was a gop shared video of a democrat which was slightly speed up to seem more aggressive.

Also simple framing to cut off context from the original has been a very common form of misinformation for decades.

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

    to be more clear: block chain for images is a solution in search of a problem because no one is looking for mass-verified images, they are looking for source-verified images, because you can still fake something on the block chain at point of creation. In 2025 the main concern about faked images is with AI, but more sophisticated and more convincing images can be made with older, even analog technology like airbrushing.

    Your example of a sped up Democrat could still be disseminated on the block chain and it would do nothing to confirm or deny its veracity.

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

    It would but it would be much easier to find/link and compare with the actual original.

    Of course i have mentioned this was never a complete finished idea, just some thoughts i had for years.

    Nowadays i can conceptualise ai tools that detect near duplicates but those obviously were not a thing when i first came up with this.

    I would hope that it would be considered very damning if an official publishers referred to false footage while having all the tools to find and refer to the original. So would it Be damning for the uploader and all footage recorded with their device.

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

    isn't the entire concept just trying to side step journalism though? The block chain is just replacing journalistic standards for something that is more easily corrupted with no guarantee of a better outcome.

    And often in tricky journalism such as exposés, you don't want your source to be trackable. That's why Robert Maxwell was such a piece of shit as a newspaper journalist, he would shop his sources to Mossad.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago*

    Not at all. I consider journalists the best potential of early adapter.

    As a consumer i don't care if i have to copy or screenshot or need to list sources if i am Just sharing to friends.

    Publishers however have a responsibility towards the public to provide fair information. And if i post publicly i also try to pay a bit more attention. (Ignoring i failed exactly that just earlier today)

    There would be nothing stopping anyone to ignore the system and keep sharing unverified pixels but its a real flex be able to provide open and transparent information about your sources almost upfront.

    If enough established organisation start doing this then the ones that don’t will stick out like they have something to hide.

    The exposé is an interesting example I had not yet considered but again i think nothing is stopping publishers from publicly stating they cannot provide sources but have the means to get it independently verified.

    I also believe its possible for a camera/recorded to exist anonymously on the blockchain, just like you don't know the owner of a crypto wallet.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent