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?

  • lemmefixdat4u@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    9 days ago

    When video or audio evidence is submitted, it will be questioned as to its authenticity. Who recorded it? On what device? Then we’ll look for other corroborating evidence. Are there other videos that captured the events in the background of the evidence video? Are there witnesses? Is there contradictory evidence?

    Say there’s a video depicting a person committing murder in an alley. The defense will look for video from the adjoining streets that show the presence or absence of the murderer before or after. If those videos show cars driving by with headlights on, they will look for corresponding changes in the luminosity of the crime video. If the crime happened in the daytime, they will check that the shadows correspond to Sun’s position at that moment. They’ll see if the reflections of objects match the scene. They’ll look for evidence that the murderer was not at the scene. Perhaps a neighbor’s surveillance camera shows they were at home or their cell phone indicated they were someplace else.

    But if all these things indicate the suspect was in the alley and the video is legitimate, that’s powerful evidence toward a conviction.

    • BrianTheeBiscuiteer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      9 days ago

      Are there other videos that captured the events in the background of the evidence video?

      I think this is key in a trial setting. A published picture might be unique but to think the photographer snapped just one picture while nobody else was present or also photographing is a bit of a stretch.