If AI and deep fakes can listen to a video or audio of a person and then are able to successfully reproduce such person, what does this entail for trials?

It used to be that recording audio or video would give strong information which often would weigh more than witnesses, but soon enough perfect forgery could enter the courtroom just as it’s doing in social media (where you’re not sworn to tell the truth, though the consequences are real)

I know fake information is a problem everywhere, but I started wondering what will happen when it creeps in testimonies.

How will we defend ourselves, while still using real videos or audios as proof? Or are we just doomed?

  • SavvyWolf
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    6 hours ago

    You still have the same problem though. You can produce a camera in court and reject one of the images, but you still need to prove that the camera wasn’t tampered with and it was the one at the scene of the crime.

      • SavvyWolf
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 hours ago

        The camera can sign things however it wishes, but that doesn’t automatically make the camera trustworthy.

        In the same sense, I can sign any number of documents claiming to have seen a crime take place but that doesn’t make it sufficient evidence.