(I do not think it was AI.)
But you are correct, if it was in fact AI, showing how he (or someone else) made it at the time would certainly help get him off the hook.
Guy could've probably picked a better place to base jump anyway, national parks are notorious for having a billion laws that don't really exist anywhere else.
You can't even take your cat white river rafting on the grand canyon >:( https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/36/7.4
(Yeah, me neither.)
I wish there were more places to legally enjoy BASE jumping on US public lands.
There's far more to see outside of those national parks and forests than there is inside. Look up any paragliders or bush pilots on YouTube that live near federal land, and they pretty much go wherever they want to go.
If you're an avid hiker or camper and are visiting the US, find local documentation on where to visit or befriend someone in the area who can make recommendations, and you'll get to see our natural landscape without all of the tourists or regulations. You can legally BASE jump off a cliff, hike in the nude, mine for gold, set up an impromptu gun range, and camp there for a couple of weeks, or indefinitely if you hike two miles each day.
If it had been legal, and had he jumped in broad daylight, I think he’d have survived that day.
Isn't lying to a federal investigator also a crime? Searching suggests 18 U.S.C. § 1001.
It depends on how much money you have.
Finding an original copy on a go-pro would likely be pretty compelling evidence but this (and the more scary politically centered questions like this) are why I wish we had a way to build a durable chain of custody into these technologies. It is infeasible from everything I've seen but it would be a big win for society.
More likely, the signing would have to use compression-resistant steganography, otherwise it's pretty easy to just remux/re-encode the video to strip the metadata.
We'd probably hit a lot of that with SSL if it wasn't so unimportant from a political perspective[1]... but if the thing we were trying to secure is going to boost or damage some prominent politician directly then the level of pressure is going to be on a whole different scale.
1. And we might still have that corruption of SSL when it comes to targeted phishing attacks.
I don't think that's true. Only for someone who wanted to prove authenticity to grab the signature. No private keys would be exposed (except those which were hacked.)
If Netflix and Amazon can't keep their 4k HDR webrips from being leaked (supposedly via extracted licenses from Nvidia Shields), I have no idea how we'd expect all camera manufacturers to do it. Maybe iPhones and flagship Apple devices, but even then we'd find vulns in older devices over time.
And those people now have the power to put you in jail, by putting your camera's signature on illegal content.
You've also just made journalism 3 notches harder. Like documenting atrocities in, say, North Korea. Or for whistleblowers in your home steel mill run by a corporate slavedriver.
Oh. Also. Why are you choosing the camera side to put this on? Why not the AI side? Require watermarks and signatures for anything created in such a way…
…of course that has its own set of intractable problems.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Content_Authenticity_Initiativ...
Do you? Consider for a moment all the dissidents and protestors who would be ensnared by their own devices then, with no "it was all ai" defense available?
I don't think the lack of a durable chain of custody really provides any protection - that protection needs to come from a strong legal system and social contract to protect whistleblowers. If you're thinking of, as an example, an Iranian smuggling out protest footage, they're already taking an extreme risk and have a state using numerous tools to try and track them down - but the lack of a durable chain gives a wide area of authorities to cast doubt on the truth.
I think your question is interesting to ponder and I think there are arguments in both directions - but my mind keeps coming back to the tank man photo being smuggled out of China and how much more difficult it would be in the modern world for a single image to carry such weight.
That social contract is quite a bit of a hit&miss if you look at countries across the globe. Same for the strong legal system. Other concerns aside, does this not make the whole approach a non-starter?
Nah. People who do something like this can't help but brag. They'll incriminate themselves in seconds voluntarily.
"I extracted and added the noise profile to the AI generated video with a goPro to make it look legitimate"
https://www.nps.gov/subjects/policy/upload/NPS_Guidance_Memo...
For similar reasons, suicide should not be criminalized. Yes I am serious.
Although, it would be nice if we could give people a general “I understand the risk and won’t ask for help if it goes wrong” waiver for dangerous activities.
If the prosecution can prove it was legit, that's prison for sure.
You trying to start a union in your workplace? Expect video of you jacking off in public to leak online. Video of cop mercilessly beating a black guy? Inadmissible, could have been AI.
It will only get worse as video and audio generation get better and better.
This flock stuff is b.a.d.
They'll need a flock cam on the summit if they want to push that any further.
BASED jumping is an acronym that stand for five categories of fixed objects from which one can jump:
- Buildings
- Antennas
- Spans
- Earth
- Deepfakes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q1ULJ92aldE (<- finally found the track used in so many CNC machining youtube shorts).