[WrongOnInternet]

The problem with this approach is that it is easily bypassed. Simply point your camera at a high quality monitor playing an AI generated video, and there you go, and authenticated AI video. In the future, video evidence is going to be as convincing as it was for 99.9999...% of human history. We survived with out it in the past. We'll survive without it in the future.

[andrewflnr]

I doubt it will be that easy to bypass. A fake would still have to withstand pixel-level analysis on the level of methods that already detect tampering in regular video. For one thing, that will have to be a very high quality monitor indeed to leave no detectable trace of e.g. moire patterns.

[latexr]

A fake doesn’t need to be perfect to be effective, it just needs to fool enough people. Most posts won’t (and couldn’t ever) be scrutinised at that level.

[canadiantim]

What does it mean for the court system though, what happens to video and image evidence?

[dghlsakjg]

We have been able to manipulate legal documents for 100s of years. We have been able to manipulate images for over 100 years. We have been able to manipulate images on any computer with a few hours of training for for 30+ years. We have been able to manipulate videos with training for 20+ years.

It is an order of magnitude easier now (likely as easy as documents have been to manipulate for 30ish years now). However, this is not a new problem, courts have always had to deal with manipulated evidence.

[deadbabe]

That is for the jury to decide. If they think the evidence is fabricated in some way, they will have reasonable doubt.

Lawyers must carefully pick jurors depending on how susceptible they may be to AI manipulation.

[ElevenLathe]

Good eating for "expert witnesses" that can verify/debunk videos in court.

[jjk7]

Can AV evidence not be faked without AI tools?