Talk:2650: Deepfakes - Revision history

DMG at 20:17, 31 July 2022

2022-07-31T20:17:32Z

162.158.34.61 at 09:22, 31 July 2022

2022-07-31T09:22:23Z

DMG: Being more explicit.

2022-07-31T04:00:45Z

Being more explicit.

These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For: Oh, so close!

2022-07-31T01:53:42Z

Oh, so close!

Elizium23: neural net

2022-07-30T01:35:00Z

neural net

172.70.91.128 at 16:26, 28 July 2022

2022-07-28T16:26:55Z

172.70.211.88: reply

2022-07-28T15:37:43Z

172.70.85.221 at 14:46, 28 July 2022

2022-07-28T14:46:52Z

172.70.211.88: Punctuation/ros

2022-07-28T12:01:05Z

Punctuation/ros

172.70.211.88: Expertise

2022-07-28T12:00:07Z

Expertise

@@ Line 16: / Line 16: @@
 :: Thanks for that Mmx - but I intended my comment as an ironically absurd 'me-being-clueless' joke about ambiguity in humor. I will be more explicit next time. LOL. [[User:DMG|DMG]] ([[User talk:DMG|talk]]) 04:00, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
 ::: {{w|Poe's law}} in action, almost exactly as he described in The Pit And The Pendulum... [[Special:Contributions/162.158.34.61|162.158.34.61]] 09:22, 31 July 2022 (UTC) ;)
 :I was thinking of the fact that White Hat is actually convinced and that Cueball is not looking down upon him or thinking hi is stupid. Many of those conversations ends pretty bad for White Hat, which is not the case here. So after reading the above I agree that saying there is no joke is wrong. But I still think the play out of this comic is far from the regular style of White Hat and Cueball conversations. Another where they discuss photographs, one of my favorites, [[1314: Photos]], pans out a more normal way for this type of conversations. Not sure it needs explanation, but that was why I felt that there was some true part in the "no standard joke" idea. Because there was no joke on White Hat. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 06:54, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
 ::Was looking for other examples of what I feel is more standard and found these: [[2557: Immunity]], [[2555: Notifications]], [[2475: Health Drink]], [[2368: Bigger Problem]] and [[2165: Millennials]]. Needed to go back three years to find five, so they are not all over the place. But I only looked through about a third of the 156 comics with White Hat. ;-) But there is probably also some similar to this one. I just noticed these where White Hat is frowned at and remembered them. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 07:18, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

@@ Line 15: / Line 15: @@
 :: For the record, that last reference is referring to xkcd comic #1958, not the year 1958... [[User:Mathmannix|Mathmannix]] ([[User talk:Mathmannix|talk]]) 02:00, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
 :: Thanks for that Mmx - but I intended my comment as an ironically absurd 'me-being-clueless' joke about ambiguity in humor. I will be more explicit next time. LOL. [[User:DMG|DMG]] ([[User talk:DMG|talk]]) 04:00, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
 :I was thinking of the fact that White Hat is actually convinced and that Cueball is not looking down upon him or thinking hi is stupid. Many of those conversations ends pretty bad for White Hat, which is not the case here. So after reading the above I agree that saying there is no joke is wrong. But I still think the play out of this comic is far from the regular style of White Hat and Cueball conversations. Another where they discuss photographs, one of my favorites, [[1314: Photos]], pans out a more normal way for this type of conversations. Not sure it needs explanation, but that was why I felt that there was some true part in the "no standard joke" idea. Because there was no joke on White Hat. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 06:54, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
 ::Was looking for other examples of what I feel is more standard and found these: [[2557: Immunity]], [[2555: Notifications]], [[2475: Health Drink]], [[2368: Bigger Problem]] and [[2165: Millennials]]. Needed to go back three years to find five, so they are not all over the place. But I only looked through about a third of the 156 comics with White Hat. ;-) But there is probably also some similar to this one. I just noticed these where White Hat is frowned at and remembered them. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 07:18, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

@@ Line 14: / Line 14: @@
 : It's all a matter of taste. For example - take the closing reference in the explanation "A similar dilemma was discussed in 1958: Self-Driving Issues, where technology does not create a new way to lie, but may make such lies more convincing to certain parties (in the other strip, self-driving cars)." --- although there is no punchline it is humorous (absurd) because there were no self-driving cars 64 years ago, and I am pretty sure XKCD was not even around in 1958. Or, maybe it is an example a text deepfake provided for elucidation.  [[User:DMG|DMG]] ([[User talk:DMG|talk]]) 17:56, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
 :: For the record, that last reference is referring to xkcd comic #1958, not the year 1958... [[User:Mathmannix|Mathmannix]] ([[User talk:Mathmannix|talk]]) 02:00, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
 :I was thinking of the fact that White Hat is actually convinced and that Cueball is not looking down upon him or thinking hi is stupid. Many of those conversations ends pretty bad for White Hat, which is not the case here. So after reading the above I agree that saying there is no joke is wrong. But I still think the play out of this comic is far from the regular style of White Hat and Cueball conversations. Another where they discuss photographs, one of my favorites, [[1314: Photos]], pans out a more normal way for this type of conversations. Not sure it needs explanation, but that was why I felt that there was some true part in the "no standard joke" idea. Because there was no joke on White Hat. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 06:54, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
 ::Was looking for other examples of what I feel is more standard and found these: [[2557: Immunity]], [[2555: Notifications]], [[2475: Health Drink]], [[2368: Bigger Problem]] and [[2165: Millennials]]. Needed to go back three years to find five, so they are not all over the place. But I only looked through about a third of the 156 comics with White Hat. ;-) But there is probably also some similar to this one. I just noticed these where White Hat is frowned at and remembered them. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 07:18, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:53, 31 July 2022
Line 37:		Line 37:
	:The idea is that lies in text are analogous to fake photos and videos. It doesn't really work for "deep" fakes, because it doesn't take sophisticated neural network methods to write e.g. "Elizium23 said they eat worms." [[Special:Contributions/172.70.211.90\|172.70.211.90]] 06:20, 28 July 2022 (UTC)		:The idea is that lies in text are analogous to fake photos and videos. It doesn't really work for "deep" fakes, because it doesn't take sophisticated neural network methods to write e.g. "Elizium23 said they eat worms." [[Special:Contributions/172.70.211.90\|172.70.211.90]] 06:20, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
	::[[2173: Trained a Neural Net\|Yes it does]]. [[User:Elizium23\|Elizium23]] ([[User talk:Elizium23\|talk]]) 01:35, 30 July 2022 (UTC)		::[[2173: Trained a Neural Net\|Yes it does]]. [[User:Elizium23\|Elizium23]] ([[User talk:Elizium23\|talk]]) 01:35, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
		+
		+	When I got to the part where it read ''"...we've been able to make text deepfakes for 5000 years."'', I needed to stop and look up when the Bible was written. Darn, I thought I had them this time. [[User:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For\|These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For]] ([[User talk:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For\|talk]]) 01:53, 31 July 2022 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:35, 30 July 2022
Line 36:		Line 36:
	Are they comparing the copper ingot complaint to a forgery or a fake review? If the actual customer was lying about his copper ingots, I don't see what that has to do with deepfakes and photoshop forgeries. It seems to me that they're suggesting that someone other than the customer forged the message to Ea-Nasir, posing as the customer. [[User:Elizium23\|Elizium23]] ([[User talk:Elizium23\|talk]]) 02:21, 28 July 2022 (UTC)		Are they comparing the copper ingot complaint to a forgery or a fake review? If the actual customer was lying about his copper ingots, I don't see what that has to do with deepfakes and photoshop forgeries. It seems to me that they're suggesting that someone other than the customer forged the message to Ea-Nasir, posing as the customer. [[User:Elizium23\|Elizium23]] ([[User talk:Elizium23\|talk]]) 02:21, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
	:The idea is that lies in text are analogous to fake photos and videos. It doesn't really work for "deep" fakes, because it doesn't take sophisticated neural network methods to write e.g. "Elizium23 said they eat worms." [[Special:Contributions/172.70.211.90\|172.70.211.90]] 06:20, 28 July 2022 (UTC)		:The idea is that lies in text are analogous to fake photos and videos. It doesn't really work for "deep" fakes, because it doesn't take sophisticated neural network methods to write e.g. "Elizium23 said they eat worms." [[Special:Contributions/172.70.211.90\|172.70.211.90]] 06:20, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
		+	::[[2173: Trained a Neural Net\|Yes it does]]. [[User:Elizium23\|Elizium23]] ([[User talk:Elizium23\|talk]]) 01:35, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

@@ Line 30: / Line 30: @@
 ::::If you only want to clip cardboard cutouts to scenery, it doesn't matter whether your camera is digital or analogue (but the grain of any decent analogue film will hold more detail than any CCD/whatever, if you want to let someone to check the negative or memory card directly). When faking it from that stage on, the electronic revision of an image is trivial compared to convincingly messing about with plates/film/etc. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.221|172.70.85.221]] 14:46, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
 :::::That depends on whether the cutouts are matte or gloss, and other things. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.211.88|172.70.211.88]] 15:37, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
 Are they comparing the copper ingot complaint to a forgery or a fake review? If the actual customer was lying about his copper ingots, I don't see what that has to do with deepfakes and photoshop forgeries. It seems to me that they're suggesting that someone other than the customer forged the message to Ea-Nasir, posing as the customer. [[User:Elizium23|Elizium23]] ([[User talk:Elizium23|talk]]) 02:21, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
 :The idea is that lies in text are analogous to fake photos and videos. It doesn't really work for "deep" fakes, because it doesn't take sophisticated neural network methods to write e.g. "Elizium23 said they eat worms." [[Special:Contributions/172.70.211.90|172.70.211.90]] 06:20, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

@@ Line 28: / Line 28: @@
 ::Depending upon the actual intent, I can think of many ways that a committed hoaxer (who is familiar with hoax-busting details) can at the very least maintain plausible doubt over any idea of image-manipulation, at least enough to keep those who 'want to believe' unconvinced by any suggestions that something (other than the scene attempted to be depicted) is clearly technically wrong. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.242|141.101.99.242]] 09:55, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
 :::Still, presumably that is more effort and requires considerably more expertise than clipping cardboard cutouts to some scenery. Whereas with today's cameras the clips may be more visible, and the visual characteristics of the cutouts may be more prominent. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.211.88|172.70.211.88]] 11:58, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
 Are they comparing the copper ingot complaint to a forgery or a fake review? If the actual customer was lying about his copper ingots, I don't see what that has to do with deepfakes and photoshop forgeries. It seems to me that they're suggesting that someone other than the customer forged the message to Ea-Nasir, posing as the customer. [[User:Elizium23|Elizium23]] ([[User talk:Elizium23|talk]]) 02:21, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
 :The idea is that lies in text are analogous to fake photos and videos. It doesn't really work for "deep" fakes, because it doesn't take sophisticated neural network methods to write e.g. "Elizium23 said they eat worms." [[Special:Contributions/172.70.211.90|172.70.211.90]] 06:20, 28 July 2022 (UTC)

@@ Line 27: / Line 27: @@
 ::The Cottingly duo just tried to set up a real (but misleading) scene, pointed and shot and had no further recourse to go back into the developed image/negative to suppress any accidentally showing bits of the hairpins. And any actual attempts to do so were as likely to ruin more of the photographic plates than would have been improved, before they got their hand in (at great cost to unreusable materials), whilst I can try a small smudge and ''Undo'' it, with one of more Ctrl-Zs, if it actually does not improve any visual discrepancy...
 ::Depending upon the actual intent, I can think of many ways that a committed hoaxer (who is familiar with hoax-busting details) can at the very least maintain plausible doubt over any idea of image-manipulation, at least enough to keep those who 'want to believe' unconvinced by any suggestions that something (other than the scene attempted to be depicted) is clearly technically wrong. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.242|141.101.99.242]] 09:55, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
-:::Still, presumably that is more effort than clipping cardboard cutouts to some scenery, whereas with today's cameras the clips may be more visible, and the visual characteristics of the cutouts may be more prominent. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.211.88|172.70.211.88]] 11:58, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
+:::Still, presumably that is more effort and requires considerably more expertise, than clipping cardboard cutouts to some scenery, whereas with today's cameras the clips may be more visible, and the visual characteristics of the cutouts may be more prominent. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.211.88|172.70.211.88]] 11:58, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
 Are they comparing the copper ingot complaint to a forgery or a fake review? If the actual customer was lying about his copper ingots, I don't see what that has to do with deepfakes and photoshop forgeries. It seems to me that they're suggesting that someone other than the customer forged the message to Ea-Nasir, posing as the customer. [[User:Elizium23|Elizium23]] ([[User talk:Elizium23|talk]]) 02:21, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
 :The idea is that lies in text are analogous to fake photos and videos. It doesn't really work for "deep" fakes, because it doesn't take sophisticated neural network methods to write e.g. "Elizium23 said they eat worms." [[Special:Contributions/172.70.211.90|172.70.211.90]] 06:20, 28 July 2022 (UTC)