Aaaand it’s happening just as we all predicted. Stealing likeness in a whole new way
Right? I remember watching some time ago a AI-generated video of an actress - I think it was Kirsten Stewart - doing a monologue. It was eerily undistinguishable from reality. This is happening, and actors have all the rights to be upset by it until proper compensation rules are in place.
I think this goes deeper than just actors compensation. This will take things to a new level when this hits courtrooms. Imagine sitting there watching a video of you doing something you never actually did entered into evidence.
Captain Kirk in "Court Martial".
"But...that's not the way it happened."
Even as a professional editor for over a decade who is actively looking for them, it is becoming increasingly difficult to tell what is AI generated and what is real. I’m right most of the time, but most of the time is only like 75% of the time. And again, this is when I am actively looking for them. And the tech is only getting better.
Society is going to have to adjust to actually demand some proof of authenticity when it comes to content like this.
The good news is that techniques like public-private key cryptography do actually provide a way to do this, so at least on the technical side, this is a solvable problem. The harder part is getting people to question content that they want to be true, like political propaganda that affirms their own beliefs and biases.
Just imagine the mess we'll be in when you can just generate an unlimited amount of videos of some disliked minority committing fake crimes and send them directly to people that you know will be receptive to radicalization, since you've already identified them through data brokers and targeted advertising.
Maybe this is just me getting older - hell, it probably is - but I'm getting more and more detached from tech in general and trying to find more meaning and enjoyment in real-life interaction, community, friendships, and connection, as well as more physical hobbies. I'm not convinced that humans are really equipped to mentally handle the world we're creating, and I'm finding myself not wanting much to do with it.
As a famous celebrity who has to deal with this a lot, here is an easy guide to tell real celebrities accounts from fake celebrities accounts on the Internet: Ask yourself, would it make sense for the real celebrity to promote these product on social media?
Does it make sense for Academy Award winning character actor Tom Hanks to promote a random dental service? No, therefore, that is a fake account.
Does it make sense for pop superstar Taylor Swift to promote her latest re-recorded albums on her social media? Yes, therefore, that's a real account.
Does it make sense for Academy Award nominated actress Margot Robbie to promote her latest movie on her first personal social media account in years? Yes, therefore, that's a real account.
Does it make sense for Matt Damon, Tom Brady, or Kim Kardashian to promote cryptocurrency on their social media despite never showing any interest in technology before? No, therefore, these are fake accounts.
Does it make sense for Elon Musk, the richest man in the world in his 50s, to act like an immature middle schooler and post bad memes on the Internet to sell a cryptocurrency based on a dead meme? No, therefore, that's a fake account.
This method works every time.
Does it make sense for Margot Robbie to point out what kind of accounts may be real or fake, including her own account in the example? Yes. Therefore it is a real account.
Thanks Margot!
You're welcome, soloner. Now, would you guys help support our strike and the livelihood of the majority of actors by buying a shirt or a mug? Here's your chance to look like a real celebrity.
http://sagaftra.org/official-sag-aftra-strike-swag-available
I appreciate that not only does Margot Robbie want to entertain me, she wants to educate me. True renaissance woman.
Matt Damon
unclear
wasn’t he famously roasted for being part of that Crypto.com ad?
That's another joke. The other two for FTX and EthereumMax respectively.
oh lol, I didn’t even get to Brady and Kardashian, was stumped on Damon, well played overall
People made fun of the ad and the lines he said but people also don't understand that he didn't write it. Crypto.com was already going to fail by the time their crazy expensive ad came out. Matt Damon on the other hand seems to be doing just fine.
He’s an actor, so I don’t think anyone actually thought he wrote anything he said on that ad, but it was an endorsement, which is more difficult to parse whether or not he actually invested in or supported it. And, probably like most people, I didn’t care enough to read in depth about it afterward.
I didn't see anything in the article about it, but is Tom Hanks not suing these people?
Does it make sense for Elon Musk, the richest man in the world in his 50s, to act like an immature middle schooler and post bad memes on the Internet to sell a cryptocurrency based on a dead meme? No, therefore, that’s a fake account.
This actually would make sense for someone like Elon Musk.
... That's the joke. Dogecoin.
I love that this account still exists
Seems to work 4/5 times if you ask me
As intelligent as she is beautiful, folks!
Does it make sense for an internationally recognized actress to come into the Fediverse to explain too notch level critical thinking....hmm. Agree with the points - yep. Think it's actually Margot Robbie - doubtful.
I'm just applying the above rules
…although he has not shied away from approving digitally altered versions of himself in film.
Besides being irrelevant, does this seem a little bit judgmental to anyone else?
Whoever wrote that apparently doesn't understand consent
Tom Hanks was asking for it.
If he didn't want to be digitally altered, he shouldn't have given us the idea.
Between voice cloning, gpt-4, and social media, the technology exists TODAY for scammers to call you at 4am with the voice and intimate knowledge of a loved-one, and tell you that they need you to send them money for an emergency.
You thought old people were easy to scam before? We're about to enter a golden age of manipulation.
My grandmother is a Greek immigrant and doesn't speak English very well. Back in 2017 someone called her and told her myself and my mother were dead and she spent like 3 days freaking out and crying. I can only imagine what would happen if someone were to do that today while emulating a voice she knew...
Probably a good idea to come up with a code word or something for verifying it's you.
winning by not answering my phone ever
Yes, the technology exists. No, it's not a threat for your grandma. Scammers would first need need to know which phone number is your grandmas, them they need to find out the relatives of your grandma, obtain enough sample data from your voice and train an AI model for at least a few hours to imitate your voice. That's not a realistic scenario to do for a slim chance of getting a few thousand bucks. This kind of social engineering attack is only viable for very rich persons and businesses.
I'm sorry, but your assessment of how difficult that would be is WAAAAAY off.
Scammers are already doing stuff like this en masse with highly customized email scams.
The way this scam would work is to start with YouTubers, where grabbing the voice data is easy. Then you find their Facebook profile... Very easy, since people use the same usernames, or they go out of their way to link their profiles.
It's a pretty easy step to make friend requests with those people. And then a very easy leap to find their relatives real names and towns through their Facebook connections.
Now you take their connections and towns and do reverse phone number lookups.
ALL of this can be automated. Every step.
The voice cloning and gpt-powered phone calls can be automated now, too.
The only reason this isn't happening at scale is that scammers haven't had enough time to adapt yet.
To be fair, if Skynet hunts humanity down, the terminators sounding like America's Sweetheart Tom Hanks does come as some consolation.
"Reach for the sky!"
Anything for you, TH!
That's exactly why SAG-AFTRA are still striking rn.
The good thing about this is that people maybe start questioning if a product for some reason gets "better" because their favorite actor says so - because he got money for doing so.
Imho, he doesn't need to warn his fans, they are not affected by this at all. Maybe the toothpaste is even a bit cheaper compared to the one that actually paid a (probably very pricey) Hollywood star for their ad. He's the victim, not his fans.
Tom Hanks and some woman going
DENTAL PLAN!
Lisa needs braces!
DENTAL PLAN!
Lisa needs braces!
DENTAL PLAN!
Lisa needs braces!
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
Simpsons did it first.