Deutsch
English
Forgery has been around since time immemorial. Comrades who had fallen out of grace with Stalin were removed from pictures, models are given a wasp waist and aunt Tilda suddenly loses weight via Photoshop. It's therefore fair to say digital images should be viewed with a healthy dose of skepticism. So far, videos have proven more resilient to manipulation, and if they were tampered with, the changes were easy to spot. Researchers from Carnegie Mellon University have now developed a method that may usher in a new era of forgery. Artificial intelligence now autonomously creates fakes that leave me speechless.
The technology allows content (like movement, facial expressions) from one video to be superimposed onto another - with stunningly realistic results! In one example, an Obama interview was layered on top of a Trump interview with Trump now saying Obama's lines in perfect sync. Developers also took the facial expressions from US television host John Oliver and applied them to his late night colleague Stephen Colbert - including minute details like nods, smiles and blinks. What distinguishes these videos from common fakes is that they were created almost fully autonomously by AI, with little need for human intervention. While in the past, entire teams spent countless hours on manipulating historic recordings, e.g. for Forrest Gump, AI is now taking over. Animating the corner of a mouth originally required highly skilled specialists, today, computers animate entire faces (and very soon people and complex scenes) on their own. Yes, if you look closely, you can spot minor flaws but the technology is still in its infancy, after all. And don't forget: AI never rests, it constantly learns and develops. I bet my boss would love for me to be the same way!
Let me present an analogy to shed some light on how AI learns. Imagine criminals seeking to counterfeit money but lacking a great deal of the required technical skills. Their first amateurish bills get circulated - and quickly spotted by the police who then issue a press statement. In it, they outline how to spot counterfeit money. The counterfeiters study the facts, recognize their mistakes and create the next iteration of forged money. The police again detect the bills, after more extensive research, issue another press statement and the next cycle begins. There are two adversaries here contesting with each other while generating new insightful data, which is why this approach is called "Generative Adversarial Network" (GAN). The generator (counterfeiters) forges money and the discriminator (police) detects errors and issues a statement which is then analyzed, after which the next round commences. The project is considered completed only once the discriminator has no more objections.
These networks can even be creative on their own! On October 25, 2018, the famous auction house Christie's in New York auctioned off a picture by Edmond de Belamy for $423,500. True, there exist more expensive pictures and more famous artists, still, the auction caused quite a sensation. That's because Edmond Belamy is not human! A generative adversarial network had dabbled in painting - with great success. Consequently, the painting does not bear a name but the mathematical representation of the algorithm used during its creation. And we're already one step further. Songs entirely composed by AI are already on the market and AI-driven movies, computer games and programs for self-driving cars are in the works. Naturally, use of AI can always be limited to certain aspects of a project, if needed. Picture a computer game that has players roam through gigantic virtual worlds. Until now, designing these landscapes was incredibly labor-intensive. For example, the game "Just Cause 4" features a freely explorable world of 1,024 square kilometers with intricate details from bumpy roads to single shrubs and various kinds of wildlife. Its creation could now be entirely left to AI, with QA being the only human element in the development process. This could save millions of development costs.
Still, despite the positives there's always potential for abuse, i.e. deepfakes in the form of images or videos that look deceptively real. As the aforementioned Obama and Trump example shows, it's already difficult to identify fakes today. And, bearing in mind the observed pernicious effects of fake news in social networks, this technology could have fatal consequences in the wrong hands. How quickly could a fake video depicting a violent crime bring down a politician? How long would it take intelligence agencies to manufacture videos of crimes allegedly committed by an opposing state? And how long would it take us to get the nasty images out of our heads should they turn out to be fake later on? It seems we'll have to face these questions very soon. AI developers are aware of this danger and try to develop new analytical methods parallel to their AI research to detect deepfakes. I fear, in spite of their efforts, not everything can be stuffed back into Pandora's box, which the technology has already opened. So be wary when you encounter videos of Trump singing the Russian national anthem at the top of his lungs or the Pope boldly tapdancing in front of a huge crowed!
What I would like to know: Will you approach "revealing" videos online with more distrust from now on? Or do you only believe half of what you see anyway?
I suspect that the legal system will, as usual, be years behind this technology, and have a hard job to tell real from fake video evidence, as it matures.
I like most people rely on common sense in as much as if a thing looks too good to be true it is untrue. I rely on that developed censor to protect me from persuasive politicians and all pervading advertising which promises that we will all live forever and there will be a happy ending to any situation if we all follow blindly the advice or rhetoric being dished out in the media. In other words if you believe in fairies you will get a fairy tale ending .
I have to be a bit cautious in my criticism of this fakery, because I'm somewhat guilty of it myself!
I'm a photography enthusiast who makes extensive use of Photoshop to improve the images that I enter for competitions at my local photography club.
I hasten to add that this is perfectly legal within the rules of the competitions, but I frequently add a different sky to a photograph, change day to night, remove extraneous objects/people... and so on.
Obviously, the techniques that you have described here, Sven, are on a completely different level of sophistication, but in essence they're not so very different from what I (and thousands of other photographers) do to present a manipulated picture of 'reality'.
However, I hope that I would never undertake such manipulation in pursuit of a dishonest political end.
If every photographer were to feel guilty for having tweaked their shots a little, we'd be living in a rather sad world. :) I myself admit to having added a little more pizzaz to sunsets or slimmed down one or two aunts - for a good cause, naturally.
Hi Sven,
I would not disbelieve anything relating to the manipulation and alteration of photographs, videos/movies and other graphical images.
The reason, when I lived in England, my grandfather who was a keen amateur photographer, around 1956 he showed me a photograph of himself facing his camera and he had two heads protruding from his shoulders.
Way back then he explained how photographs could be manipulated to make viewers believe they were real.
Thanks for the informative article Sven, it shows how far the advancement of technology in graphics has reached today, and continues to advance, ad infinitum.
Sven
In my near seventy(70) years I have seen more than I would like to have seen. I have learned to believe only half of what you hear and much less of what you see on TV or the interweb. Love your Commentaries keep up the good work.
My personal philosophy regarding the internet is quite simple: my default position is to believe NONE of what I see there unless it has been verified several times over.
I'm thinking of applying that philosophy to everything that happens outside my home. And, to be honest, the living room might be a little suspect too.
It seems to me that some coders are coding their way out of of a job not to mention all of the above areas you included. Pretty soon, people will become sloths while AIs do the work.
Coder codes machines > machines code more machines > machines improve code > no coder required
Coder codes machines > machines get raw materials > machines transport the materials > machines build more machines > new machines make more machines and products > machines transport products and themselves > no human production line needed
I don't beleive everything I see, but that is a personal judgement and seldom based on fact. No problem with rejecting the more outrageous fake news it's the tweaked news that is dangerous. The best beleived lies are 90% true.
As you very rightly point out, removing the initial emotional response to a subsequently proven lie is very difficult.
We are moving into murky times. We need to think seriously about the shotgun approach to progress. Do we really need AI ? It's no longer a question though - we got it.
The mind boggles, hz
Does AI cry, bleed, think or have feelings? Some programmers with nothing better to do use their computing skills to create a fake image of a famous painting.
It is called "artificial intelligence" because poorly educated people do not see the irony, of something artificial, having any intelligence.
Old, old saying from before computers,; Believe nothing you hear and only half of what you see.
Thank you for this very interesting article. Over the past 10 years I have become increasingly aware of false and twisted media articles used by politically motivated news media as well as the photoshopped politicians. However this is perhaps the scariest development.
How will we, or the courts, be able to differentiate between truth and lies?
A recent video has been viral on WhatsApp showing President Putin of Russia side by side with President Emmerson Mnangagwa of Zimbabwe, following the later's recent visit to that country. A procession of Zimbabwean Ministers then files past with a suitable dialogue to be greeter by his Russian counterpart following the signing of various agreements. Is this real, as the international press and Twitter has been remarkably quiet, or is it an artificially created production that runs on for about 5 minutes? The above report on AI and video manipulation certainly makes you think!
Interesting post Sven. I am an artist in the USA. I've been quite curious to the whole AI thing for awhile. Not sure that I trust everything I see... made some art based on the AI presence in the world... A piece titled "Where's My Soul". It's at :
https://elbgraphics.artstation.com/projects/OyqXgv
Apologies on plug for myself. Just a quicker way to find it than asking you to search...