"More politely called AI-generated videos, or synthetic media, usage is growing rapidly in sectors including news, entertainment and education, with the technology becoming increasingly sophisticated.
One of the early commercial adopters has been Synthesia, a London-based firm that creates AI-powered corporate training videos for the likes of global advertising firm WPP and business consultancy Accenture.
"This is the future of content creation," says Synthesia chief executive and co-founder Victor Riparbelli.
To make an AI-generated video using Synthesia's system you simply pick from a number of avatars, type in the word you wish for them to say, and that is pretty much it."
What are we going to do? We will use our best instincts about "what is likely that this person in the video would do? Is he doing something in this video that is too strange? That is out of character for him/her? Can I independently corroborate this, from a completely different source?"
We always used this process, but we will have to get better at it.
People develop improved technology, but they should develop improved culture.
Good culture combined with bad technology is better than bad culture combined with good technology.
So we rely on our inner Baloney Detectors. Always have a late model Baloney Detector, well oiled, with a fresh battery.
And re-read Shakespeare's play, "Othello." He failed at this. Very instructive play. And rip-snorting, wild ride, entertainment.
They can swap faces onto other bodies. So, there is a concern about revenge porn, where you substitute your ex-girlfriend's face onto porn. And then allege that she really made porn.
They say it's still unclear what law says about this.
But a person obviously owns their own face image, as the first, inalienable copyright. It's theirs and nobody can use it without permission.
Nothing unclear about that.
For instance, google is careful not to show recognizable people in its street views. They spend much valuable time and energy blurring faces. Why? They don't want lawsuits.
Theft of identity is a well known concept, defined as illegal.
Yep. It's hard to believe but this video contains totally artificial representations of people that never actually existed in real life.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qA2SknZRVS4
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-56278411
"More politely called AI-generated videos, or synthetic media, usage is growing rapidly in sectors including news, entertainment and education, with the technology becoming increasingly sophisticated.
One of the early commercial adopters has been Synthesia, a London-based firm that creates AI-powered corporate training videos for the likes of global advertising firm WPP and business consultancy Accenture.
"This is the future of content creation," says Synthesia chief executive and co-founder Victor Riparbelli.
To make an AI-generated video using Synthesia's system you simply pick from a number of avatars, type in the word you wish for them to say, and that is pretty much it."
This technology should be illegal.
Agree.
What are we going to do? We will use our best instincts about "what is likely that this person in the video would do? Is he doing something in this video that is too strange? That is out of character for him/her? Can I independently corroborate this, from a completely different source?"
We always used this process, but we will have to get better at it.
People develop improved technology, but they should develop improved culture.
Good culture combined with bad technology is better than bad culture combined with good technology.
So we rely on our inner Baloney Detectors. Always have a late model Baloney Detector, well oiled, with a fresh battery.
And re-read Shakespeare's play, "Othello." He failed at this. Very instructive play. And rip-snorting, wild ride, entertainment.
They can swap faces onto other bodies. So, there is a concern about revenge porn, where you substitute your ex-girlfriend's face onto porn. And then allege that she really made porn.
They say it's still unclear what law says about this.
But a person obviously owns their own face image, as the first, inalienable copyright. It's theirs and nobody can use it without permission. Nothing unclear about that.
For instance, google is careful not to show recognizable people in its street views. They spend much valuable time and energy blurring faces. Why? They don't want lawsuits.
Theft of identity is a well known concept, defined as illegal.