Anonymous ID: 11e1ac Jan. 7, 2020, 7:22 a.m. No.7740344   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>0346 >>0354

https://outline.com/pgFE5H

 

Facebook bans deepfakes, but new policy may not cover controversial Pelosi video

 

Facebook has banned users from posting computer-generated, highly manipulated videos, known as deepfakes, seeking to stop the spread of a novel form of misinformation months before the 2020 presidential election.

 

But the policy — first reported by The Washington Post, and confirmed by Facebook late Monday — does not prohibit all doctored videos: The tech giant’s new guidelines do not appear to address a deceptively edited clip of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi that went viral on the social network last year.

 

“While these videos are still rare on the internet, they present a significant challenge for our industry and society as their use increases,” Monika Bickert, the company’s vice president for global policy management, wrote in a blog post.

 

The changes come as Bickert prepares to testify at a congressional hearing later this week on “manipulation and deception in the digital age.” The inquiry marks the latest effort by House lawmakers to probe Facebook’s digital defenses four years after Russian agents weaponized the site to stoke social unrest during the 2016 race.

 

Going forward, Facebook intends to ban videos that are “edited or synthesized” by technologies like artificial intelligence in a way that average users would not easily spot, the company said, including attempts to make the subject of a video say words that they never did.

 

Facebook, however, will not ban videos manipulated for the point of parody or satire. And it signaled that other lesser forms of manipulation would not be outlawed, either, though they could be fact-checked and limited in their spread on the social networking site.

 

The policy does not appear to cover the infamously altered “drunk” video of Pelosi that was viewed millions of times on Facebook last year. Though her speech was slowed and distorted in the video to make her sound drunk, the effect was accomplished with relatively simple video-editing software. To contrast with more sophisticated computer-generated “deepfakes,” disinformation researchers have referred to these kinds of videos as “cheapfakes” or “shallowfakes.”

 

A spokesman for Pelosi did not immediately respond to a request for comment. At the time, Facebook acknowledged that its fact-checkers had deemed the video “false,” but Facebook declined to delete it because, as a spokeswoman said, “we don’t have a policy that stipulates that the information you post on Facebook must be true.”

Anonymous ID: 11e1ac Jan. 7, 2020, 7:23 a.m. No.7740346   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>0398

>>7740344

 

Nor does the policy seem to restrain other simpler forms of video deception, such as mislabeling footage, splicing dialogue or taking quotes out of context, as in a video last week in which a long response Joe Biden delivered to an audience in New Hampshire was heavily trimmed to make him sound racist.

 

Facebook’s omissions concerned Hany Farid, a digital forensics expert at the University of California at Berkeley whose lab has worked with Facebook on deepfakes. He said the company’s new approach is too “narrowly construed.”

 

“These misleading videos were created using low-tech methods and did not rely on AI-based techniques, but were at least as misleading as a deep-fake video of a leader purporting to say something that they didn’t,” Farid said in an email Monday night. “Why focus only on deep-fakes and not the broader issue of intentionally misleading videos?”

 

But the policy does appear to address deepfake videos in which women’s faces are superimposed into pornography without their consent, seen in an increasing amount of online harassment campaigns. Such videos made up roughly 96 percent of all deepfake videos found last year, according to the research firm Deeptrace Labs.

 

Facebook and other tech firms last year sponsored a “deepfake detection challenge,” offering prize money to researchers who could deliver the most refined techniques to automatically detect manipulated videos. A set of real and manipulated videos was released to researchers last month, and the challenge is scheduled to end in March.

 

Siwei Lyu, the director of a computer-vision lab at the State University of New York at Albany and member of the Deepfake Detection Challenge’s advisory group, applauded Facebook’s attempts to clearly pinpoint altered media, saying that “the line drawn on user-discernible manipulated videos is operable and useful for implementing this policy.”

 

The language that Facebook is using to delineate its rules resembles a policy raised at a June 2019 meeting in San Francisco convened by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace to discuss how social media platforms should deal with manipulated media ahead of the 2020 election, according to a person who was present. The person, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss a private meeting, said there was significant debate about what degree of editing is required before something is declared misleading and whether social media companies should adopt more sweeping rules against deceptive content.

 

The policy’s provisions for videos “manipulated for purposes of parody or satire” could potentially lead to thorny debates over whether a video labeled as “deceptive” was merely intended to lampoon for dramatic effect.

 

It’s unclear, for instance, whether the policy would ban a deepfake like that of Mark Zuckerberg, created last year during the aftermath of the Pelosi video scandal, in which the Facebook chief appeared to gleefully celebrate his control of user data. The creator told The Post last year that the video was a form of satire and “a cautionary tale of technology and democracy.”

Anonymous ID: 11e1ac Jan. 7, 2020, 7:24 a.m. No.7740354   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>7740344

>first reported by The Washington Post

 

https://outline.com/hDqPs7

 

Facebook wouldn’t delete an altered video of Nancy Pelosi. What about one of Mark Zuckerberg?

Anonymous ID: 11e1ac Jan. 7, 2020, 7:55 a.m. No.7740537   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>0550

>>7740524

 

Soldiers BLOCK Venezuela's opposition leader Juan Guaido from entering National Assembly, before he finally makes his way in and leads rendition of the national anthem

 

Venezuelan opposition leader Juan Guaido made his way into the legislative building on Tuesday following a standoff with security forces.

 

Once inside, the opposition leader recognized by the US as Venezuela's rightful president, led lawmakers in a rendition of the national anthem.

 

Guaido was initially blocked by dozens of national guardsmen from entering.

 

'These are not barracks!' shouted Guaido when he was blocked by National Guard troops wearing helmets and carrying riot shields.

Anonymous ID: 11e1ac Jan. 7, 2020, 8:31 a.m. No.7740805   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>7740777

>Across the river, the “crown jewel” of the Gulf Cartel — Miguel Alemán, Tamaulipas.

https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=https%3A%2F%2Fes.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FEscudo_de_Tamaulipas

Anonymous ID: 11e1ac Jan. 7, 2020, 8:37 a.m. No.7740830   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>7740808

>The painting captures one North Vietnamese Colt fleeing and the other being pursued by the Air America Huey piloted by Moore as mechanic Woods fires his AK-47 at the cockpit

https://www.cia.gov/news-information/featured-story-archive/2007-featured-story-archive/singular-aerial-victory-in-the-vietnam-war.html

Anonymous ID: 11e1ac Jan. 7, 2020, 8:49 a.m. No.7740898   🗄️.is 🔗kun

https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/1214202955156664325

 

Review: Ricky Gervais’s sharpest barb poked Hollywood’s piety. Nobody cared.