What happens to trust when anything can be faked?

 

Ted Gioia asks the question.

It is now possible to alter reality and every kind of historical record—and perhaps irrevocably. The technology for creating fake audio, video, and text has improved enormously in just the last few months. We will soon reach—or may have already reached—a tipping point where it’s impossible to tell the difference between truth and deception.

• Can I tell the difference between a fake AI video and a real video? A few months ago, I would have said yes. But now I’m not so sure.
• Can I tell the difference between fake AI music and human music? I still think I can discern a difference in complex genres, but this is a lot harder than it was just a few months ago.
• Can I tell the difference between a fake AI book and a real book by a human author? I’m fairly confident I can do this for a book on a subject I know well, but if I’m operating outside my core expertise, I might fail.

At the current rate of technological advance, all reliable ways of validating truth will soon be gone. My best guess is that we have another 12 months to enjoy some degree of confidence in our shared sense of reality.

But what happens when it’s gone?

. . .

Consider those loonies who believe that the Apollo moon landing never happened. Now imagine a world in which everybody is like that about everything—because nothing can be proven.

We have always lived in a world of disputes, but never on this new level of total skepticism. Consider a football game: I think the ref made a bad call, and you disagree—but at least we both believe that a game is actually happening.

Not anymore.

We once disagreed on how we interpreted events. Now we can’t even agree on the existence of events.

There's more at the link.  Go read the whole thing.  It's worth it.

That's a very good question.  It has very serious implications for every aspect of our lives, from the micro to the macro.  Consider:

• If a government announces the existence of a new and purportedly dangerous virus, and orders everyone to be vaccinated against it, how many of us will believe them?  After COVID-19, you can bet your bottom dollar I won't, even if they broadcast video of sufferers from the disease collapsing and dying on camera - because my immediate suspicion will be that they've faked the video.
• If two nation-states at war (think Russia and Ukraine) make claims about battlefield successes, or trumpet the success of an air strike, whom do we believe?  We aren't there to see for ourselves.  The only evidence we have will be video clips on Twitter or Tiktok.  How do we know they're genuine?  How do we know whether an atrocity, or an incident described as a casus belli, actually took place at all?
• If convictions in court rely on technological tools such as security camera footage, what will the jury do if the defendant's lawyers claim that the cops faked the footage?  The odds of that happening get better and better as the criminal justice system is challenged to take offenders off the streets.  We already know of cases where a criminal might not have committed a particular crime, but is railroaded by the "system" anyway, because the prosecutors and the cops "know" that he's committed many other crimes for which they can't obtain evidence to convict him.  Their answer - put him in jail for something, rather than let him off.  That may be karma catching up with him, but it's not justice.
• What about civil claims - say, a divorce case relying on video of a spouse committing adultery?  How many porn videos are already out there, purporting to show famous actresses having sex with someone, only for it to emerge that it's a "deep-fake", artificially contrived video showing the actress' head superimposed on someone else's body?

This is going to become worse by the day.  I don't know the answer, but Mr. Gioia is very right to ask the question.  What are we going to do about it?

Peter