One of the glaring weaknesses of LDSinc is the paucity of prophecy from their designated Prophet, Seer and Revelator, who receives no revelations, sees nothing and prophesizes even less. They missed not only covid but everything, really.

No problem. AI technology has the situation covered. Deepfake to the rescue:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/robtoews/2020/05/25/deepfakes-are-going-to-wreak-havoc-on-society-we-are-not-prepared/

Snippet:

“While impressive, today's deepfake technology is still not quite to parity with authentic video footage—by looking closely, it is typically possible to tell that a video is a deepfake. But the technology is improving at a breathtaking pace. Experts predict that deepfakes will be indistinguishable from real images before long.”

I prophesy the possibility that everything LDSinc missed will be back-filled, so to speak. Did Hinckley miss 9-11? Surely he didn’t, we have video. Did Rusty miss Covid-19? Ye blasphemer, you lie. We have the video. Etc.

Our future is deepfaked. Welcome to the wonders of Science and Technology.

Human

This has already been done with audio so video can't be far behind. And, for those of us who think we can tell where the edit is, keep in mind that most people don't really listen that closely.

Deepfake! Another faith promoting tool inspired by Heavenly Father. Who says He doesn't love us?


I can't wait for the "video proof" as they finally discover Horses and Chariots in America that are carbon dated to Father Lehi's time period.

Technology is one thing. Combine that with rampant gullibility and, well, too obvious to even spell out what will happen.

If you go on YouTube, you can see some good deepfakes of famous movies. They are a little rough around the edges, but they are done by amateurs. Imagine what the intelligence community can do. I'm sure it's far superior. You could have the Ayatollah endorse feminism, or New Zealand declare war on Australia. That's not happened yet, but imagine what they could have done with Iraq. (Back then they got fifty people to stand in front of a statue of Saddam Hussein and pull it down... The camera angles made it look as if the square was full when most of it was empty.)

The big media outlets have been making snake eyes and saying "trussst in me" when in fact they are some of the biggest liars of the lot. More so than most of the small outlets they hate

Here's one.
It is Bernard Derome from 1970, from Quebec.
The real Bernard Derome is alive today.
He did the voice with some modification to make him sound young.

They made the ad for Loto-Quebec, the 50th anniversary.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q2zwnQHTtZY

~~~~iceman9090

Yes, we've been working on this for sometime, and are very optimistic about our new generation of AL-gorithms. You'll believe what we want you to believe.

+Winston Smith:
Don't you mean Al Gore rythems?

~~~~iceman9090

Some people are so stunted that they believe delusions even without being subjected to outside manipulation.

They might, for instance, think that 1984 was a critique of the USSR. Right, Jorda--I mean Winston?

This is why the Facebook position that it should not differentiate between factually accurate political speech and fraudulent communications is so dangerous. Zuckerberg's abdication of responsibility makes it far easier for outside actors like Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea to use social media to exacerbate the divisions in Western democracies.

Could Stalinism, could Stasi, have been defeated if they had social media and deep fake technology? I doubt it. How quaint appears now the era when Stalin rubbed someone's image out of a propaganda photo and the world recoiled in horror.

Yes. I think we should make Zuckerberg the official arbiter of all things Deepfake; starting with Facebook, and then expanding to all other social media and mainstream media outlets; if, of course, *he does a good job.*

Your suggestion accentuates the problem. Once Deepfake identification becomes both technologically intractable, and entrenched in society generally, it won't be Zuckerberg who is in charge of the truth filter, it will be Winston.

If you think Zuckerberg is the one dictating the content of Facebook, you need to put the bottle down and call your sponsor.

"Zuckerberg's abdication of responsibility makes it far easier for outside actors like Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea to use social media to exacerbate the divisions in Western democracies."

This isn't about who is dictating the content of Facebook. Its about your suggestion that Zuckerberg should police that content for factual accuracy in order to avoid outside foreign agitators. Not doing so, according to your comment, is an "abdication of [his] responsibility."

The point I was making is that as much as one might want Zuckerberg (or anyone else) to assume that role in the short run--in order to protect us all from the influence of false social media--as the determination of the truth or falsehood of such social media becomes more and more intractable (Deepfake), the more likely it will be that the arbiter's personal motivations (politics) will affect such a determination.

I believe that this was the concern of the OP.

Right, Jaime.

That any American can still believe “Russia Russia Russia” is a testament to how well propaganda works.

Where did that propaganda come from? MSM.

To believe that the MSM wouldn’t deepfake is silly beyond words, and demonstrates an inability to understand what has happened to America.


My heart sank that people bought the “Russia” narrative just as much as my heart sank that people bought the birth certificate narrative. But to still buy into it, and propagate it on social media no less (if that is what RfM is), is an example of the very kind of bullshitting these people seem to fear and want to be saved from via censorship. It’s appallingly bootlicking, and leads to worse evil.

Let's remember the force of your original post! Deepfake is no respecter of media outlets, ideologies, or agendas. It can in principle be found anywhere and everywhere!

You may well be right that the MSM propagated a Deepfake narrative that insists, "It's Russia, Russia, Russia." But don't lose sight of the fact that in "Deepfake principle" there might also be a Deepfake narrative that insists "Not-Russia, not-Russia, not-Russia."

In other words, we all rely upon information from media sources--whether mainstream or otherwise. And "Deepfake" is certainly not limited to MSM sources. It may be involved to set me up through my favored media sources, as well as yours. After all, few of us are on the front lines of our beliefs! So, it would seem that there is no place for dogmatic rhetoric here, regardless of where one's position might lie.

As for myself, I think there are a few principles we can apply to at least attempt to sort out reality from Deepfake. Let me suggest a few:

1. How close is the information and the informant to the original sources?
2. Have the original sources been identified?
3. What would an original source have to gain or lose?
4. Is there a professional consensus (scientific) involved?
5. What does the opposition say, and how do these principles apply to their claims?

And finally,

5. What is my gut feeling as to the reliability of the information? (To be used cautiously)

Now, as I personally and fallibly apply these principles to my own views on important issues, I have come to the following conclusions:

1. Climate change is real;
2. The Clovid virus is real;
2. Russian did interfere in our elections; and
3. DT is an A-H

But, heh, I could be wrong on all counts! But then so could you. That is what Deepfake teaches us.

Tell us again, Jaime, how Einstein neglected the effect of gravity on orbits and hence thought the sun rotates around the earth.

Give it a rest, LW.

Russia, China, N. Korea, or bad guy de jour is the least of your country’s problems. And falling for that line, the monster over-seas, solves nothing and only emboldens the oligarchs who have you and your fellow citizens by the throat. Don’t be a dupe.

As for setting up Zuckerberg as a censor-god, or any of the tech billionaires for that matter, that is sheer lunacy. Madness.

Ah yes, Human, with the depth of a sidewalk puddle after a summer shower.

Tell me where I said Zuckerberg should be a "censor-god." Not atypically, you missed the point.

Document control and traceability has been a big issue in regulated corporate life. The capability is there to capture every change made to a document in Word (and others) and the history follows the document with proof of who did what. We use audit trails for much of what we do electronically. We have to build and test the audit trail capability to validate our systems.

Why can't this be done with videos? Say a "certified" video has a locked tracker that can be verified. If the tracker is breached, it becomes uncertified.

There have got to be ways social media could be more accountable about the sources of things. Why can't suspected bots have a flag? Why can't photos, worksheets, videos and documents have originating and editing history automatically attached?

Where I work, I could get nailed if I don't produce the audit trail of anything the FDA requests. If the CFR requires it, I wish social media could do more to let people know which items are suspicious.

Yeah, I'm a dreamer.

Apparently the saying "Seeing is believing" needs to be retired. Been that way for quite a while now.

Another favorite saying, when seeing something surprising, was, "I can't believe my eyes." Well, guess what? You are wise not to.

My business life improved a hundred percent with e-mail and suddenly clients could not take back or change what had been said/written. Hearing what you say about changes being detectable in Word also gives me hope. But not trust. I just feel like anything can be hacked now at some point and will. It is just what *is* now.


This thread and most of the others is bringing me down.