• Captain Aggravated@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      22 hours ago

      Cryptographic signatures are something we should have been normalizing for awhile now.

      I remember during the LTT Linux challenge, at one point they were assigned the task “sign a PDF.” Linus interpreted this as PGP sign the document, which apparently Okular can do but he didn’t have any credentials set up. Luke used some online tool to photoshop an image of his handwriting into the document.

    • panda_abyss@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      That’s not really feasible without phones doing this automatically.

      Even then didn’t the first Trump admin already argue iPhone video can’t be trusted because it’s modified with AI filters?

        • TheBlackLounge@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          21 hours ago

          Sign every video automatically? Sounds like chatcontrol all over.

          Also, I could just generate a video on my computer and film it with my phone. Now it’s signed, even has phone artifacts for added realism.

          • lightsblinken@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            16 hours ago

            i think the point is to be able to say “this video was released by X, and X signed it so they must have released it, and you can validate that yourself”. it means if you see a logo that shows CNN, and its signed by CNN, then you know for sure that CNN released it. As a news organisation they should have their own due diligence about sources etc, but they can at least be held to account at that point. versus random ai generated video with a fake logo and fake attribution that is going viral and not being able to be discredited in time before it becomes truth.

            • TheBlackLounge@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              11 hours ago

              then you know for sure that CNN released it.

              Why not link to the original CNN source then, if you want to be trusted? You’d have to do that anyways if you want to use the CNN footage in your own video.

              I don’t think people who care about the validity of a news video will be helped much with this, and people who don’t care about the truth can easily ignore it too.

              As a news organisation they should have their own due diligence about sources etc

              But what if they can’t anymore? News orgs don’t only show video that they recorded. They have videos from freelance reporters, people who were at an event, government orgs, other news orgs in other countries…

              • lightsblinken@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                9 hours ago

                sure, totally ok to incorporate those video items & publish your (signed) story. i think we’ve seen pretty clesrly that people want to publish and be recognised for their publications. building a web of trust has to start somewhere. currently we’re in the “its all very difficult, we cant solve all the tricky things, so we’re not even trying” stage. hopefully we find a way to move forward, even if its not perfect.