How deepfakes undermine truth and threaten democracy | Danielle Citron

October 8, 2019 posted by

[This talk contains mature content] Rana Ayyub is a journalist in India whose work has exposed
government corruption and human rights violations. And over the years, she’s gotten used to vitriol
and controversy around her work. But none of it could have prepared her
for what she faced in April 2018. She was sitting in a café with a friend
when she first saw it: a two-minute, 20-second video
of her engaged in a sex act. And she couldn’t believe her eyes. She had never made a sex video. But unfortunately, thousands
upon thousands of people would believe it was her. I interviewed Ms. Ayyub
about three months ago, in connection with my book
on sexual privacy. I’m a law professor, lawyer
and civil rights advocate. So it’s incredibly frustrating
knowing that right now, law could do very little to help her. And as we talked, she explained that she should have seen
the fake sex video coming. She said, “After all, sex is so often used
to demean and to shame women, especially minority women, and especially minority women
who dare to challenge powerful men,” as she had in her work. The fake sex video went viral in 48 hours. All of her online accounts were flooded
with screenshots of the video, with graphic rape and death threats and with slurs about her Muslim faith. Online posts suggested that
she was “available” for sex. And she was doxed, which means that her home address
and her cell phone number were spread across the internet. The video was shared
more than 40,000 times. Now, when someone is targeted
with this kind of cybermob attack, the harm is profound. Rana Ayyub’s life was turned upside down. For weeks, she could hardly eat or speak. She stopped writing and closed
all of her social media accounts, which is, you know, a tough thing to do
when you’re a journalist. And she was afraid to go outside
her family’s home. What if the posters
made good on their threats? The UN Council on Human Rights
confirmed that she wasn’t being crazy. It issued a public statement saying
that they were worried about her safety. What Rana Ayyub faced was a deepfake: machine-learning technology that manipulates or fabricates
audio and video recordings to show people doing and saying things that they never did or said. Deepfakes appear authentic
and realistic, but they’re not; they’re total falsehoods. Although the technology
is still developing in its sophistication, it is widely available. Now, the most recent attention
to deepfakes arose, as so many things do online, with pornography. In early 2018, someone posted a tool on Reddit to allow users to insert faces
into porn videos. And what followed was a cascade
of fake porn videos featuring people’s favorite
female celebrities. And today, you can go on YouTube
and pull up countless tutorials with step-by-step instructions on how to make a deepfake
on your desktop application. And soon we may be even able
to make them on our cell phones. Now, it’s the interaction
of some of our most basic human frailties and network tools that can turn deepfakes into weapons. So let me explain. As human beings, we have
a visceral reaction to audio and video. We believe they’re true, on the notion that
of course you can believe what your eyes and ears are telling you. And it’s that mechanism that might undermine our shared
sense of reality. Although we believe deepfakes
to be true, they’re not. And we’re attracted
to the salacious, the provocative. We tend to believe
and to share information that’s negative and novel. And researchers have found that online
hoaxes spread 10 times faster than accurate stories. Now, we’re also drawn to information that aligns with our viewpoints. Psychologists call that tendency
“confirmation bias.” And social media platforms
supercharge that tendency, by allowing us to instantly
and widely share information that accords with our viewpoints. Now, deepfakes have the potential to cause
grave individual and societal harm. So, imagine a deepfake that shows American soldiers
in Afganistan burning a Koran. You can imagine that that deepfake
would provoke violence against those soldiers. And what if the very next day there’s another deepfake that drops, that shows a well-known imam
based in London praising the attack on those soldiers? We might see violence and civil unrest, not only in Afganistan
and the United Kingdom, but across the globe. And you might say to me, “Come on, Danielle, that’s far-fetched.” But it’s not. We’ve seen falsehoods spread on WhatsApp and other
online message services lead to violence
against ethnic minorities. And that was just text — imagine if it were video. Now, deepfakes have the potential
to corrode the trust that we have in democratic institutions. So, imagine the night before an election. There’s a deepfake showing
one of the major party candidates gravely sick. The deepfake could tip the election and shake our sense
that elections are legitimate. Imagine if the night before
an initial public offering of a major global bank, there was a deepfake
showing the bank’s CEO drunkenly spouting conspiracy theories. The deepfake could tank the IPO, and worse, shake our sense
that financial markets are stable. So deepfakes can exploit and magnify
the deep distrust that we already have in politicians, business leaders
and other influential leaders. They find an audience
primed to believe them. And the pursuit of truth
is on the line as well. Technologists expect
that with advances in AI, soon it may be difficult if not impossible to tell the difference between
a real video and a fake one. So how can the truth emerge
in a deepfake-ridden marketplace of ideas? Will we just proceed along
the path of least resistance and believe what we want to believe, truth be damned? And not only might we believe the fakery, we might start disbelieving the truth. We’ve already seen people invoke
the phenomenon of deepfakes to cast doubt on real evidence
of their wrongdoing. We’ve heard politicians say of audio
of their disturbing comments, “Come on, that’s fake news. You can’t believe what your eyes
and ears are telling you.” And it’s that risk that professor Robert Chesney and I
call the “liar’s dividend”: the risk that liars will invoke deepfakes to escape accountability
for their wrongdoing. So we’ve got our work cut out for us,
there’s no doubt about it. And we’re going to need
a proactive solution from tech companies, from lawmakers, law enforcers and the media. And we’re going to need
a healthy dose of societal resilience. So now, we’re right now engaged
in a very public conversation about the responsibility
of tech companies. And my advice to social media platforms has been to change their terms of service
and community guidelines to ban deepfakes that cause harm. That determination,
that’s going to require human judgment, and it’s expensive. But we need human beings to look at the content
and context of a deepfake to figure out if it is
a harmful impersonation or instead, if it’s valuable
satire, art or education. So now, what about the law? Law is our educator. It teaches us about
what’s harmful and what’s wrong. And it shapes behavior it deters
by punishing perpetrators and securing remedies for victims. Right now, law is not up to
the challenge of deepfakes. Across the globe, we lack well-tailored laws that would be designed to tackle
digital impersonations that invade sexual privacy, that damage reputations and that cause emotional distress. What happened to Rana Ayyub
is increasingly commonplace. Yet, when she went
to law enforcement in Delhi, she was told nothing could be done. And the sad truth is
that the same would be true in the United States and in Europe. So we have a legal vacuum
that needs to be filled. My colleague Dr. Mary Anne Franks and I
are working with US lawmakers to devise legislation that would ban
harmful digital impersonations that are tantamount to identity theft. And we’ve seen similar moves in Iceland, the UK and Australia. But of course, that’s just a small piece
of the regulatory puzzle. Now, I know law is not a cure-all. Right? It’s a blunt instrument. And we’ve got to use it wisely. It also has some practical impediments. You can’t leverage law against people
you can’t identify and find. And if a perpetrator lives
outside the country where a victim lives, then you may not be able to insist that the perpetrator
come into local courts to face justice. And so we’re going to need
a coordinated international response. Education has to be part
of our response as well. Law enforcers are not
going to enforce laws they don’t know about and proffer problems
they don’t understand. In my research on cyberstalking, I found that law enforcement
lacked the training to understand the laws available to them and the problem of online abuse. And so often they told victims, “Just turn your computer off.
Ignore it. It’ll go away.” And we saw that in Rana Ayyub’s case. She was told, “Come on,
you’re making such a big deal about this. It’s boys being boys.” And so we need to pair new legislation
with efforts at training. And education has to be aimed
on the media as well. Journalists need educating
about the phenomenon of deepfakes so they don’t amplify and spread them. And this is the part
where we’re all involved. Each and every one of us needs educating. We click, we share, we like,
and we don’t even think about it. We need to do better. We need far better radar for fakery. So as we’re working
through these solutions, there’s going to be
a lot of suffering to go around. Rana Ayyub is still wrestling
with the fallout. She still doesn’t feel free
to express herself on- and offline. And as she told me, she still feels like there are thousands
of eyes on her naked body, even though, intellectually,
she knows it wasn’t her body. And she has frequent panic attacks, especially when someone she doesn’t know
tries to take her picture. “What if they’re going to make
another deepfake?” she thinks to herself. And so for the sake of
individuals like Rana Ayyub and the sake of our democracy, we need to do something right now. Thank you. (Applause)


100 Replies to “How deepfakes undermine truth and threaten democracy | Danielle Citron”

  1. pjacob45 says:

    Really, a profession that has morphed into law as vehicle for seeking out profit, versus a profession for doing things like she is suggesting – reasonable and moral changes….. who's she trying to kid here? Really? Seriously? Lawyers, the ones where as soon as there might be a reasonable and wise law, scramble to find a way around the law and profit from the scrambling. Those people? Making laws to fix the problem. From the legal profession? Hilarious.

  2. Christopher Rapczynski says:

    This only really affects big public figures and high profile entities, and they have ignored,trot upon, and milked the little man dry so I really find it hard to care

  3. Neurotic Penguin says:

    Dude WTF, you leaked weak points of the West! #imamswatchyoutubetoo

  4. Prof. M. R. Millsap says:

    Aaahhh.. Daniel Citron, why did you have to do this talk? Im afraid youre going to jinx us

  5. Sudo Ex says:

    This is a deep fake Ted talk

  6. Neghard Flaghut says:

    Democracy is stupid anyway.

  7. yawnbox says:

    Solving sexual privacy with increased surveillance? What? We don’t solve societal problems by telling tech companies how to control content. We don’t do it by empowering cops.


    You are made India pm modi in upset mood while clean the poops champion

  9. Optical Clarity says:

    They've been learning from cnn & MSNBC

  10. Iana Pate says:

    Sexual life should be private period. Anyone who helps to spread true or fake videos of public or regular people should be punished. People who post such videos or pictures should be shamed and pay substantial fee.

  11. William Fields says:

    well….i know what im looking up tonight

  12. S Shiva says:

    WTH does this lady know?

  13. Donald Allaway says:

    The truth will no longer be known,

  14. Redclaw says:

    Really, I mean come on, deepfakes this deepfakes that, a soon as you said deepfake you lost all credibility

    Let's see why

    This will become the norm for many things
    How, here, AI
    the word AI is a scapegoat for a problem that doesn't exist. The same with GMOs and modern tech in general.
    We should be working to make every country supported enough to stand on its own 2 feet as 1st world countries. We should be finding renewable ways to counteract global warming. We should be furthering our understanding and making everything more accessible, we should be working towards things that make a difference, we should show people to think about the bigger picture and help people who suffer from real diseases and ailments and should be making it so no one does of the influenza or cancer

    Says we need humans to see whether or not deepfakes are dangerous or harmful. Umm no it will be computers that do that,
    You know the thing your against apparently

  15. The Mean Arena says:

    I'm more concerned with the media bias, journalists and lies more than I am concerned about DeepFakes!

  16. draco bane says:

    this conversation needed to be done in the 60s…
    …catching up…will be harder, now, if not impossible…
    as I see it…people have lost the art of critical thinking…
    …an uphill battle, covered in oil…
    …I'll have to leave this battle to the young…

  17. Jonathan says:

    We dont just go by video evidence that isnt corraberated with witnesses. Further more we shouldnt degrade the new generation to the point that their social media presence is all they define themselves by, allowing media to control and define our children.

  18. Big Ugly Boy says:

    …and it is extremely dangerous to our democracy

  19. michael says:

    😂😂😂 Ted talks so desperate to point to sources of ideological manipulation… Just not themselves

  20. uuuu260 says:

    How do we know this isn't a deep fake?

  21. FOUR Strokes! says:


  22. Elias says:

    Computer Science student here. This is actually a pretty interesting tool to mess with but it's one of the few branches of my field I'm cautious of. The short of it is basically that it makes video unreliable and can be used for manipulation. There are also positive applications of course. The ones that come to mind are all about content creation. Movies, games, even amauture YouTubers you get the idea. I dislike her take on trying to use the law to restrict it's use, in practice it'll only cause harm to small time creators and the exceptionally stupid users who let themselves get caught (anyone with the skills should have the tech knowledge to cover their tracks)

  23. Shivam Kumar says:

    Remember when TED talks were given by actually smart people instead of people who think they're smart?

  24. blakkwaltz says:

    The treachery of images.

  25. MasterTuttoo says:

    Y'all need a chill pill

  26. Jaisurya Banerjea says:

    Terrifying prospect of this being used, especially for revenge on unsuspecting women. Imagine a Facebook profile picture being used for such nefarious purposes.

  27. 88blockNS says:

    A computer program that generates false videos threatens a superpower’s democracy? Lol, do you need a safe space? This is bogus.

  28. Julio Nuñez says:

    Deepfakes will destroy reputations, and credibility. Best believe , it feels like our technology is too ahead of us

  29. Yotemple TempleofYoism says:


  30. Joseph Britton says:

    She’s absolutely right…look at the political atmosphere in the US…fake news…fake news…fake news…and those followers do not believe the truth right in front of them. It’s mind numbing to watch this go on, and this all started with targeting people on social media…with real and actual “fake news” look at how quick millions of people were scammed into voting for a conman.

  31. John theux says:

    People will learn to not give a damn about everything xD

  32. Eric Alvaro says:

    I think deepfakes will make a lot of waves in the beginning, when the average joe still don't know that this sort of technology is out there, that it exists, but once it becomes a establish known fact that people and pretty much anyone can easily fake videos.. I don't think it will be that different from what already happens today, from just making up some fake twitter printscreen, or whatever.

    As it becomes a fact that anyone can do that, videos and images will have as much value as texts.

  33. IvanAndreevich says:

    Lying isn't a crime. End of story.

  34. e4r says:

    dull and hollow speech.
    TL;DR : Deep fakes can be harmful, we need to something about it.
    thank you captain obvious.

  35. Ben McNelly says:

    I feel so bad for Rana Ayyube.

  36. quicksite says:

    7:36 — The risk of disbelieving the truth — "what we call the Liar's Dividend" — The risk that liars will invoke "that was a deepfake" to escape accountability for their wrongdoing.

  37. quicksite says:

    10:42 — The law has some practical impediments — 10:50 — "If a perpetrator (of deepfakes) lives outside of the country where the vicitim lives, then you may not be able to insist that the perpetrator come in to local courts to face justice. So we're going to need a coordinated international response". There are personal responsibilities as well to surface up deepfakes that the law is not able to determine.

    This is a really tough nut to crack — Cooperation from social media companies to spend the money to use human knowledge and context to help determine harmful deepfakes, and commitment to remove them from their platforms — International law agreements and cooperation — Education of citizens to learn and recognize the "liar's dividend" ability of politicians and others to pollute the truth by branding authentic sound & video as fake news or a deep fake — Cooperation of citizens to help surface deepfakes — New legislation — Better training of law enforcement. I appreciate this well-presented presentation of both the escalating threat, injury and harm deepfakes can foist upon innocent victims — and the array of tools needed to control deepfakes that can cause deep personal harm.

  38. Rogerrramjet1 says:

    Hindus did it

  39. quicksite says:

    11:53 — "Education & training must extend to the media as well — so journalists don't amplify and spread harm-producing deepfakes"

  40. Sannidor says:

    This call for action is pointless without a single idea how such legislation should work. Growing a thicker skin and ignoring gullible idiots is not an option for neurotic women so let's restrict access to all hardware and software capable of producing deep fakes, also jail all pranksters and delegalize satire altogether -__-

  41. Ricardo Rodriguez says:

    I seen AI of realistic looking individual that don't even exist, and it's scary? For someone with Warp mind?

  42. MagicMoshroom says:

    Add certificates to videos so that sources can be traced and video integrity can be verified. Should make all untraceable videos untrustworthy by default and traceable ones could get the source into trouble if it turns out to be a fake.

  43. TakedaIesyu says:

    Here's a question: assume we reach a point where video/audio recordings are no longer considered to be 100% verifiable evidence of wrongdoing because of the spread of deepfakes and voice generators. What do we then consider to be the gold standard of undoubtable proof?

    I'm not saying this as a negative or as a "we must stick with video/audio." I'm asking this because I don't know what evidence cannot be forged in the information age, especially after the news media, images, and now videos are no longer 90% or more reliable.

  44. Obscure Project says:

    Should we ban Photoshop too? You can insert anybody into any incriminating position or place. Perhaps we should ban Audio Processing Technologies that allow you to take someone and make them say anything you want? Maybe we should even ban basic Text Editors, since you can change any wording in a Document to say anything you want it to.

    I think we need to slow down, and think about this rationally. Perhaps we shouldn't be putting so much of our Personal Data online? Or at the very least be careful about what we are putting out there. Maybe we shouldn't be posting hundreds of Pictures of ourselves online for people to have and be able to process intricate DeepFakes with (particularly our face through Selfies, the main part DeepFakes need). And if you're a public figure like a News Broadcaster you've already come to accept that that is part of the Job and comes with a nice Salary.

    Maybe instead of banning innovative technology and just allowing our enemies to use it against us we should accept that not everything we see and hear is completely real, and we should return to the more sensible and diligent form of Journalism from times past, before we all decided to toss it aside to get never ending streams of hot takes on Twitter.

    Maybe we should be holding ourselves to a higher standard, instead of expecting the Government to think for us? Perhaps we should be teaching people how to be more responsible Online? Maybe we need to be teaching people how to avoid being Doxxed?

    Most Mainstream Websites already HAVE banned DeepFakes, mind you. Reddit, Twitter, Gfycat, Discord, Pornhub, even Google added "involuntary synthetic pornographic imagery" to its ban list.

    Let's think about this rationally before we start handing more power over to the Government. Don't let these people place fear into your hearts. Be smart about your interactions online, learn to keep an open mind until you hear it from a trusted source, and protect your privacy, because once it's gone it's gone.

  45. David Sanchez says:

    The answer is hard but simple: the deep fakes, fake news and so, work beacuse PEOPLE is idiot and tends to trust on what they see and hear and not what the think…

    Remedy? There are two:

    a) a complete cynic Society that doesn't believe in anything much less something is in the news/internet/mobiles…
    b) an educated Society than BEFORE making judgments on what is being spread, think and never ever make rush empty conclusions …

    I know, this Lawyer thinks the Law could save is… stop that idea, we Human make the Law and the Trap, so that path will not work… Better tools? nooo… the deep fake have advantages of years… just changing the mind of the people will stop not just deep fakes, but any other fakes… and that is perhaps politicians DON'T want to go for that path… 😉

  46. I'm that Guy says:

    Still waiting for Elon musk as johnny sins videos


    Explained it in a great manner , Thank you.

  48. Bzkxtt says:

    What a time to be alive

  49. Brian Dillon says:

    Thank you for all the great responses to my comment. Young lady don’t worry about me I was going to the hospital any way after I wrote comment ,but only because I work there I am not schizophrenic I am OK. The world, however is in deep Doo Doo unless the good guys fix it pretty soon. Trump and many around him would give their last breath.

  50. Aisha says:

    One day, when I grow up, I want to give a TED talk

  51. Danielle H. says:

    Preparing for the corruption that is going to be exposed to the public soon…

  52. Ma0Matthew47 says:

    Great talk however, she keeps calling that lady Rhana a minority but that Indian women is most definitely not a minority in a country of 1 billion people!

  53. Simeon Radivoev says:

    Amplify distrust in the rich people of power. I see this as an absolute win.

  54. betterseatsinc2010 says:

    I want to see that video.

  55. Юлиан Гантман says:

    I'm especially concerned about those horrendous deepfakes about jews.

  56. Юлиан Гантман says:

    10:44 "You can't leverage law against people you can't find" Indeed, comrades.

  57. question ade says:

    Minority Women? Indian women are not a minority, there's fucking millions of them. What she really meant was a non white woman but is scared to just come out with it.

    If fake stories spread 10 times faster, then obviously they are very very easy to identify.

    Our trust in democratic institutions? Who's trust? The UK electorates trust? Why would the electorate trust democratic institutions when we are into the 4th year of brexit?

    Stupid woman wants to legislate to protect feelings what a moron, lol 😂😂😂

  58. D1visor says:

    You know what has and still does undermine truth and democracy?

    The public who lets corrupt individuals in positions of power and influence do as they please and with their actions affect us all.

    Like George Carlin said "what if it's not the politicians that suck? What if it's the public that sucks, yeah, maybe the people suck, how about that!"

  59. Bocbo says:

    Minute thirty in and she claims gender and minority status makes it special… ok then. I'm neither so this doesn't apply to me I guess.

    This endless race and gender framing is the quickest way to lose an audience.

    Shame… maybe she had a point but I prefer not to listen to bigots once they make it known.

  60. KGBz says:

    This Show and Zios everywhere are fake

  61. Syklone says:

    I don't think Deepfakes are quite there yet and can be spotted. However, a few years time and it'll be hard to tell. The very fact that people are addressing the dangers is a good thing though, becasue it means that something will be done about it. Whether that something is a publicly made deepfake detector or some sort of other method is unclear, but it would be worse if it fell into the wrong hands and the public had no idea what it was.

  62. Lorenzo Blum says:

    Deepfake is the logical consequence of the "make believe" world in which we live….
    Due to a long process of indoctrination, we loose our critical thinking. Politics patronise this because one wants to sell you crap and make you believe it's gold…
    Propaganda and technology are bringing us closer to a fake world everyday.

  63. Oliver Letterer says:

    a) erstmal gekleckert 😂
    b) If the most specialized organizations can’t get it right, there is no need to worry 🤷‍♂️

  64. iNeverCouldGetTheHangOfThursdays says:

    Yep, edge cases and fearmongering. Deepfaking is primarly used to put Keanu Reeves in Sesam Street songs and they are hilarious.

  65. Zepherian says:

    Deepfake: "it's not me officer, honest, it's my avatar". The problem is the technology will be used to incriminate and to also dissimulate. As information technology evolves it becomes one global gaslighting exercise. For the good people of the world I only see one solution, to turn our backs on all this bs…

  66. jhunt5578 says:

    I've been worried about this for a while. Fake News 2.0. People lack the critical thinking skills now. Deep fakes will make it so much worse.

  67. Krunoslav Stifter says:

    Hey, Danielle you are talking on TED platform. You don't need deepfake to undermine truth and threaten democracy, TED is pretty good at that as is.

  68. surya teja says:

    AI can confront human perception very easily. Technology is evolving but the majority of ppl are still…………. not even trying to…….

  69. Aurelius Tratos says:

    "Our sense that the banking system is stable." was she born after 2008? Or is she just naive?

  70. lispy jimmy illumanati is back nigga says:

    All i know is, is that we are all weak, lead by weak cowards towards insanity and chaos.

  71. Nemo Cao says:

    Everyone should know it.

  72. BigRedButton says:

    Within 1 minute, 'Men are the problem' yayyy…. 🤦🏻‍♂️🤦🏻‍♂️🤦🏻‍♂️

  73. Mount Olympus says:

    What happened was bad but Rana ayyub is anti Indian Islamist nothing more. Stop glorifying Muslims. You know what real minorities are?
    Ask parsis or jains of India

  74. Timmy's Investments says:

    I just farted, I think I destroyed democracy

  75. Creamslap Fartpie says:


  76. Nguyễn Harry says:

    I doubt that Chinese Technology Companies will cooperate to ban this technology.

  77. vano says:

    They should create a easy tool that can detect deep fakes just like there are programs which can detect photoshopped pictures

  78. rawstarmusic says:

    Deepfake, good Citron very good. Excellent.

  79. 85ddrummer says:

    There’s theories floating around that the wave of deepfakes are out to accustom the public to not believing them so when real videos do come out of politicians committing crimes they can blame deep fake

  80. Winston Robson says:

    Maybe just don't believe everything you see on tv?

  81. Wood Work says:

    So true seeing is believing

  82. Vincenzo Sobowl says:

    why is this topic now bein brought to light ik about deepfakes back in like 2008

  83. ClockworkAvatar says:

    how are "deepfakes" differebt from any other performance art?

  84. Austin W says:

    This talk was from July and it’s just now being posted?

  85. Siri Duffa says:

    If you believe that the pros outweigh the cons in regard to deepfake technology , I really worry for our future.

  86. Jesus Christ says:

    So what I’ve gotten from this video is “MEN BAD, WOMEN GOOD!”

  87. Monsieur Hentai says:

    I'm using deepfake and am a deepfake creator. You can deepfake video but you can't deepfake audio. Also, I don't know why you are obsessed with minorities. I'm always deepfaking white heterosexual people.
    And one of the most famous deepfake gif is the Trump tackle attack. that's not what I call a minority.

  88. Andrew Cliffe says:

    Yet we are prepared to silence free speech in west because of those who don't like it.

  89. Стефан Радев says:

    Ohh please, like photoshop ruin the democracy..

  90. Woodstock Dave says:

    We live in a world where we can't trust the food we eat the water we drink or the air we breathe for fear these things aren't as they appear. Welcome to the new age of human existence for however long it lasts.

  91. Inner Vigilance says:

    There will have to be new ways of identification made.

  92. Hayden Dunning says:

    This is no excuse for censorship.

  93. Brenda Rua says:

    The US PBS News Hour recently did a segment on this. It is already happening. It was in response to Trump supporters doing a fake of Nancy Pelosi making a speech looking drunk or something. Mz Citron provides plent of other examples and some implications of them. But it is good that she points out there is a place for this as legit satire.

  94. Miha Brilj says:

    the positive side of these is increased sceptisizm, mabey?

  95. Matt Roszak says:

    Outlawing the malicious use of this technology is going to be incredibly hard.
    Once a fake video is out there, you can't take it off the internet. You can't undo the damage, even if you arrest the person who did it.
    And what if you hire people from other countries to make the videos for you? What if they're as anonymous as can be? Are we gonna have to ban all internet anonymity, worldwide?
    Maybe that'll be the only solution. But is that even possible? And if it is, it'll cause many new problems!
    This is gonna get very messy.

  96. liang of next door Mr. says:

    If the development of law cannot catch up with the development of technology, a lot of problems like deepfakes are bound to happen.It's not just the law that we need to improve,we need to think more,otherwise we are likely to face problems like "deepleg","deephand"so on.

  97. Это Я says:

    Я не могу понимать делать энглиш лангуаге.

  98. davinchy psycho says:

    TED become a good instrument. Well told Danielle

  99. kotogadang says:

    Giving talks in TED talks about deepfakes? Good luck to you 🤣🤣 lol. Fortunately you're also a bigot so no harms would be done 😉

  100. Michael Grow says:

    A REPUBLICAN democracy, to be accurate. Most people enjoy half truths and half measures. <3 I do not.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *