Trains cancelled over fake bridge collapse image
59 points
1 hour ago
| 7 comments
| bbc.com
| HN
tyushk
1 hour ago
[-]
> A BBC journalist ran the image through an AI chatbot which identified key spots that may have been manipulated.

The image is likely AI generated in this case, but this does not seem like the best strategy for finding out if an image is AI generated.

reply
1659447091
1 hour ago
[-]
Under the other photos it says A photo taken by a BBC North West Tonight reporter showed the bridge is undamaged and A BBC North West reporter visited the bridge today and confirmed it was undamaged

They may have first ran the photo through an AI, but they also went out to verify. Or ran it after verification to understand it better, maybe

reply
lazystar
29 minutes ago
[-]
So.. is this where the AI hype train starts to lose steam? One AI hallucinated and caused the incident, and another AI program just wasted everyone's time after it was unable to verify the issue. Sounds like AI was utterly useless to everyone involved.
reply
1659447091
6 minutes ago
[-]
> Sounds like AI was utterly useless to everyone involved

Maybe.

Imo, I think the advances in AI and the hype toward generated everything will actually be the current societies digitally-obsessed course-correction back to having a greater emphases on things like theater, live music, conversing with people in-person or even strangers (the horror, I know) simply to connect/consume more meaningfully. It'll level out integrating both instead of being so digitally loop-sided as humans adapt to enjoy both.*

To me, this shows a need for more local journalism that has been decimated by the digital world. By journalism, I mean it in a more traditional sense, not bloggers and podcast (no shade some follow principled, journalistic integrity -- as some national "traditional" one don't). Local journalism is usually held to account by the community, and even though the worldwide BBC site has this story, it was the local reporters they had that were able to verify. If these AI stories/events accelerate a return to local reporting with a worldwide audience, then all the better.

* I try to be a realist, but when I err, it tends to be on the optimist side

reply
ceejayoz
20 minutes ago
[-]
> Sounds like AI was utterly useless to everyone involved.

Not the hoaxer!

reply
Blackthorn
36 minutes ago
[-]
Yeah, talk about begging the question. Yikes.
reply
vkou
1 hour ago
[-]
It's not, but when you have 30 minutes to ship a story...
reply
ceejayoz
1 hour ago
[-]
Reminds me of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fall;_or,_Dodge_in_Hell with the Moab plot point.
reply
crazygringo
17 minutes ago
[-]
To be clear, you don't need AI for this.

You can also just call the railroad and report the bridge as damaged.

Hoaxes and pranks and fake threats have been around forever.

reply
mschuster91
12 minutes ago
[-]
That leaves much more of a paper trail. People routinely are fined and jailed for pulling off such "pranks", partially because "fake threats"/"abuse of emergency response resources" are an exception to many freedom-of-speech laws.

A fake photo of a collapsed bridge however won't cross that criminal threshold.

reply
jameslk
26 minutes ago
[-]
> Network Rail said the railway line was fully reopened at around 02:00 GMT and it has urged people to "think about the serious impact it could have" before creating or sharing hoax images.

> "The disruption caused by the creation and sharing of hoax images and videos like this creates a completely unnecessary delay to passengers at a cost to the taxpayer," a spokesperson said.

I don't think this will work the way they think it will work. In fact, I think they just proved they're vulnerable to a type of attack that causes disruption and completely unnecessary delay to passengers at a cost to the taxpayer

reply
bgwalter
5 minutes ago
[-]
The BBC says the hoaxer should consider the effect on other people. Should Sir Keir, who wants to "turbocharge" "AI", perhaps consider the effect on other people?

So far we have almost no positive applications for the IP laundering machines.

reply
defrost
1 hour ago
[-]
It's a bit of a non story, even with the fake image.

From the article:

  Trains were halted after a suspected AI-generated picture that seemed to show major damage to a bridge appeared on social media following an earthquake.
...

  Railway expert Tony Miles said due to the timing of the incident, very few passengers will have been impacted by the hoax as the services passing through at that time were primarily freight and sleeper trains.

  "They generally go slow so as not to disturb the passengers trying to sleep - this means they have a bit of leeway to go faster and make up time if they encounter a delay," he said.

  "It's more the fact that Network Rail will have had to mobilise a team to go and check the bridge which could impact their work for days."
Standard responsible rail maintainance is to investigate rail integrity following heavy rains, earthquakes, etc.

A fake image of a stone bridge with fallen parapets prompts the same response as a phone call about a fallen stone from a bridge or (ideally !!) just the earthquake itself - send out a hi-railer for a track inspection.

The larger story here (be it the UK, the US, or AU) is track inspections .. manned or unmanned?

Currently on HN: Railroads will be allowed to reduce inspections and rely more on technology (US) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46177550

https://apnews.com/article/automated-railroad-track-inspecti...

on the decision to veer toward unmanned inspections that rely upon lidar, gauge measures, crack vibration sensing etc.

Personally I veer toward manned patrols with state of the art instrumentation - for the rail I'm familiar with there are things that can happen with ballast that are best picked up by a human, for now.

reply
lambdas
3 minutes ago
[-]
90% manned. A lot of money and time goes into getting track access.

And collecting unmanned data is still such a pain. At the moment, you stick calibration gear to a train and hope it gets as much noise free data as it can. All whilst going at least 40mph over the area you want - you’re fighting vibrations, vehicle grease, too much sunlight, not enough sunlight, rain, ballast covering things, equipment not calibrated before going out etc etc.

reply
hedora
56 minutes ago
[-]
They should already be able to detect line breaks using old technology. They send current pulses down the line to detect stuck switches, since stuck switches can cause collisions. Also, the pulses are conducted through the wheels and axles of any trains, so they can use resistance and/or timing to figure out where the trains are.

Having said that, if it was 2020 and you told me that making photorealistic pictures of broken bridges was harder than spoofing the signals I just described, I’d say you were crazy.

The idea that a kid could do this would have seen even less plausible (that’s not to say a kid did it, just that they could have).

Anyway, since recently-intractable things are now trivial, runbooks for hoax responses need to be updated, apparently.

reply
energy123
5 minutes ago
[-]
If whatever technology they installed said everything was fine, I would still want them to do what they did because the costs of being wrong are so much higher than the costs of what they did.

The point of that technology needs to be to alert you when something is wrong not to assure you that everything is fine whenever some other telemetry indicates otherwise.

reply
defrost
48 minutes ago
[-]
> They should already be able to detect line breaks using old technology.

Yes. That doesn't do much to detect a stone from a parapet rolling onto the line though.

Hence the need for inspection.

> runbooks for hoax responses need to be updated, apparently.

I'd argue not - whether it's an image of a damaged bridge, a phone call from a concerned person about an obstruction on the line, or just heavy rains or an earthquake .. the line should be inspected.

If anything urban rail is in a better position today as ideally camera networks should hopefully rapidly resolve whether a bridge is really damaged as per a fake image or not.

reply
ceejayoz
18 minutes ago
[-]
> I'd argue not - whether it's an image of a damaged bridge, a phone call from a concerned person about an obstruction on the line, or just heavy rains or an earthquake .. the line should be inspected.

Ideally? Sure.

But when someone can generate plausible disaster photos of every inch of every line of a country's rail network in mere minutes? And as soon as your inspection finishes, they do it again?

reply
lysace
1 hour ago
[-]
Yet another attack vector for the Russians.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_sabotage_operations_in...

See e.g. https://www.polskieradio.pl/395/7785/artykul/2508878,russian... (2020)

> Almost 700 schools throughout Poland were in May last year targeted by hoax bomb threats during key exams, private Polish radio broadcaster RMF FM reported.

> It cited Polish investigators it did not name as saying that a detailed analysis of internet connections and a thorough examination of the content of emails with false bomb threats turned up ties to servers in the Russian city of St. Petersburg.

reply
alephnerd
30 minutes ago
[-]
> Yet another attack vector

AI-Generated disinfo has been a known attack vector for the Russian regime (and their allied regimes) for years now [0][1].

[0] - https://cyberscoop.com/russia-ukraine-china-iran-information...

[1] - https://cloud.google.com/blog/topics/threat-intelligence/esp...

reply
gerdesj
1 hour ago
[-]
Am I bovvered?
reply