Digital signatures to provide way to tell real photos from deepfakes
    • littleblue✨@lemmy.world
      6·
      11 months ago

      The simple fact that software is fundamentally easier to upgrade/adapt compared to hardware makes this race to control profit/tech a pitiful dream of the greedy fossils at the helm of it. Besides, it would be even more naive to think they’re not already pushing their own R&D to capitalize on the AI tools available…

      • Artyom@lemm.ee
        2·
        11 months ago

        Which is super useful because I regularly verify the sources of the hashes in my metadata and most artists will make a habit of that too!

        If it’s just a hash, you’ll trick people 99% of the time with a random hash, who’s gonna check?

      • snowe@programming.dev
        1·
        11 months ago

        Sorry I meant more along the lines of…most photographers shoot in raw and then edit and convert later. How does that work with this new signing process? The second you touch your photos it’s marked as edited.

  • itsathursday@lemmy.world
    63·
    11 months ago

    It would be cool if you could add information into the camera and have it encode this information at the time of taking the photo too

    • w2tpmf@lemmy.world
      12·
      11 months ago

      All digital cameras record a bunch of data fields into the metadata of the pictures they take. Make and model of the camera, date/time, etc.

      I believe what your asking for though is custom fields. The tech already exists in the hardware, the manufacturer would just need to provide a way to set them.

      • /home/pineapplelover@lemm.ee
        3·
        11 months ago

        Lol. Whenever I send photos and videos, I make sure to delete metadata for privacy reasons. Sometimes it will show location, exact device, owner information, and other stuff I don’t want other people to know.

      • itsathursday@lemmy.world
        2·
        11 months ago

        I mean in the image data not the metadata, obviously you can encode data into an image in exif but from the sounds of this article I got the sense it was more about detecting pixel fucking which suggests it can encode more data outside the header