Burned Baby exposed

submitted by zyxzevn from (media.scored.co)

sorted by:
top (suggested)
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]binaryblob 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

It's really a fucking dystopia when photos can't be trusted anymore. How can you ever win in court when you can say for every bit of evidence that it was fabricated by AI?

GAN-detectors will stop working at some point.

[–]HiddenFox 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

If we can somehow get a date on the puppy photo then it is proof AI was used. (Ie if you have proof the puppy photo was around in 2022 we then know it was used by AI to make the baby photo.

[–]binaryblob 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

You didn't think this plan through. Where are you going to get a date? From a person? Who says you can trust this person? The only way to trust data, is if you can make a camera that can't be tampered with (which was tried by Nikon, but I think it was hacked).

[–]HiddenFox 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I would think this picture was most likely scrapped from the net somewhere. If we can find that location we could then use the wayback machine to date when it was posted. We could then say with a great deal of certainty that the image was stolen and AI altered.

[–]binaryblob 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I don't give a shit about this particular image. I was talking about the general case. Also, you would get no certainty. It would just be another probabilistic result, which means you can't derive anything with certainty (which was the problem).