The Fringe | Conspiracy, News, Politics, and Fun Forum!

Full Version: With One Photograph of YOU, Video can Be Produced Putting Words in YOUR Mouth
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3
Joe Rogan explains the methods and dangers of this technology that can take a still portrait and animate it to speak whatever the creator desires.

"Podcaster Joe Rogan has sounded the alarm on deep fake videos after researchers at Samsung AI were able to professionally create talking heads out of people in old black and white photos and even paintings.

Working at the Skolkovo Institute of Science and Technology, the scientists have been able to simplify “realistic neural talking head models” which normally require a huge dataset of images to look genuine.

The researchers created life-like talking heads with just a few images of a person and even in some cases just a single image.

“Here, we present a system with such few-shot capability,” write the scientists. “It performs lengthy meta-learning on a large dataset of videos, and after that is able to frame few- and one-shot learning of neural talking head models of previously unseen people as adversarial training problems with high capacity generators and discriminators. Crucially, the system is able to initialize the parameters of both the generator and the discriminator in a person-specific way, so that training can be based on just a few images and done quickly, despite the need to tune tens of millions of parameters. We show that such an approach is able to learn highly realistic and personalized talking head models of new people and even portrait paintings.”

https://youtu.be/p1b5aiTrGzY

SOURCE: https://www.infowars.com/a-tsunami-of-fa...ke-videos/
If so, that means all video evidence presented to a court should not be allowed.
(05-28-2019, 12:05 PM)Lobster Boy Wrote: [ -> ]If so, that means all video evidence presented to a court should not be allowed.

Right! How would you be able to prove it was doctored?
(05-28-2019, 12:17 PM)oldcynic Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-28-2019, 12:05 PM)Lobster Boy Wrote: [ -> ]If so, that means all video evidence presented to a court should not be allowed.

Right! How would you be able to prove it was doctored?

1dunno1
(05-28-2019, 12:17 PM)oldcynic Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-28-2019, 12:05 PM)Lobster Boy Wrote: [ -> ]If so, that means all video evidence presented to a court should not be allowed.

Right! How would you be able to prove it was doctored?

Imaging forensics is actually quite advanced. Software detection packages find all but the most sophisticated and costly to produce fakes quickly. An advanced fake is more difficult to detect, taking more time but, it's done on a regular basis by professionals, even in "non forensic" imaging fields.

The problem with fake images is, they are easily dropped on an unsophisticated public via social media. Most people aren't bright enough to question a fake and accept almost anything fed them.
(05-28-2019, 12:53 PM)MaximalGravity Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-28-2019, 12:17 PM)oldcynic Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-28-2019, 12:05 PM)Lobster Boy Wrote: [ -> ]If so, that means all video evidence presented to a court should not be allowed.

Right! How would you be able to prove it was doctored?

Imaging forensics is actually quite advanced. Software detection packages find all but the most sophisticated and costly to produce fakes quickly. An advanced fake is more difficult to detect, taking more time but, it's done on a regular basis by professionals, even in "non forensic" imaging fields.

The problem with fake images is, they are easily dropped on an unsophisticated public via social media. Most people aren't bright enough to question a fake and accept almost anything fed them.

Precisely! They will go for it "hook-line-and-sinker!"
(05-28-2019, 01:02 PM)oldcynic Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-28-2019, 12:53 PM)MaximalGravity Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-28-2019, 12:17 PM)oldcynic Wrote: [ -> ]Right! How would you be able to prove it was doctored?

Imaging forensics is actually quite advanced. Software detection packages find all but the most sophisticated and costly to produce fakes quickly. An advanced fake is more difficult to detect, taking more time but, it's done on a regular basis by professionals, even in "non forensic" imaging fields.

The problem with fake images is, they are easily dropped on an unsophisticated public via social media. Most people aren't bright enough to question a fake and accept almost anything fed them.

Precisely!  They will go for it "hook-line-and-sinker!"

You might find this interesting

https://petapixel.com/2019/05/16/this-mi...ke-images/
(05-28-2019, 01:13 PM)MaximalGravity Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-28-2019, 01:02 PM)oldcynic Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-28-2019, 12:53 PM)MaximalGravity Wrote: [ -> ]Imaging forensics is actually quite advanced. Software detection packages find all but the most sophisticated and costly to produce fakes quickly. An advanced fake is more difficult to detect, taking more time but, it's done on a regular basis by professionals, even in "non forensic" imaging fields.

The problem with fake images is, they are easily dropped on an unsophisticated public via social media. Most people aren't bright enough to question a fake and accept almost anything fed them.

Precisely!  They will go for it "hook-line-and-sinker!"

You might find this interesting

https://petapixel.com/2019/05/16/this-mi...ke-images/

I don't know what is real and what is fake anymore. Sign of the times..........we know of only One Creator which is the Truth and Light.
Other than The Almighty, I hold no credence to anything these days. Eyeroll
(05-28-2019, 12:53 PM)MaximalGravity Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-28-2019, 12:17 PM)oldcynic Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-28-2019, 12:05 PM)Lobster Boy Wrote: [ -> ]If so, that means all video evidence presented to a court should not be allowed.

Right! How would you be able to prove it was doctored?

Imaging forensics is actually quite advanced. Software detection packages find all but the most sophisticated and costly to produce fakes quickly. An advanced fake is more difficult to detect, taking more time but, it's done on a regular basis by professionals, even in "non forensic" imaging fields.

The problem with fake images is, they are easily dropped on an unsophisticated public via social media. Most people aren't bright enough to question a fake and accept almost anything fed them.
Good thing our political parties are not so corrupt as to produce a video of our president screwing a dog on the White House lawn, right?
(05-28-2019, 01:41 PM)Lobster Boy Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-28-2019, 12:53 PM)MaximalGravity Wrote: [ -> ]
(05-28-2019, 12:17 PM)oldcynic Wrote: [ -> ]Right! How would you be able to prove it was doctored?

Imaging forensics is actually quite advanced. Software detection packages find all but the most sophisticated and costly to produce fakes quickly. An advanced fake is more difficult to detect, taking more time but, it's done on a regular basis by professionals, even in "non forensic" imaging fields.

The problem with fake images is, they are easily dropped on an unsophisticated public via social media. Most people aren't bright enough to question a fake and accept almost anything fed them.
Good thing our political parties are not so corrupt as to produce a video of our president screwing a dog on the White House lawn, right?

So far................but there may be one with Sessions and a live chicken. Lmao
Pages: 1 2 3