Yes - however folks who do bad things rarely sign that they did bad things... so how do we tackle bad actors? On Mon, Jan 8, 2024 at 9:30 PM David Lang wrote: > On Mon, 8 Jan 2024, David Bray, PhD wrote: > > > Also signatures and the like only work for things where you actively > > attest. > > > > What if it's a supposed photo, video, or other claims that a person did > (or > > did not do) something. Sadly we know eyewitness testimony actually is > > replete with errors... which is why heretofore "roll the video tape" > > (you're at least a Gen X'er or older if you recall video tapes) has been > > what courts relied upon: > > https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/do-the-eyes-have-it/ > > > > What do we do if that's now questioned? Watermarking of photos, audio, > and > > videos can be overcome - and, sadly, may actually super-empower either > > surveillance states or authoritarian states to "control" media. So free > and > > pluralistic societies will be especially challenged here? > > signing the images and then the reputation of the person doing the signing. > > now, this doesn't solve the court problem, but there I would say there > needs to > be multiple sources in any case. > > David Lang > > > > > On Mon, Jan 8, 2024 at 5:08 PM David Lang via Nnagain < > > nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote: > > > >> signatures work, but how do you know what signatures to trust? the > current > >> approach of 'trust signatures where they have paid one of a few > companies' > >> is > >> not going to work. There will need to be some sort of decentralized > >> reputation > >> system where you can pick who you trust > >> > >> Yes, some people will chose to trust people who feed them fakes. That is > >> better > >> than giving any one entity the ability to declare anything as "true, > don't > >> you > >> dare question it" (as we have seen over the last few years) > >> > >> David Lang > >> > >> > >> On Mon, 8 Jan 2024, Dave Taht via Nnagain wrote: > >> > >>> Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2024 15:17:12 -0500 > >>> From: Dave Taht via Nnagain > >>> To: Network Neutrality is back! Let´s make the technical aspects heard > >> this > >>> time! > >>> Cc: Dave Taht > >>> Subject: Re: [NNagain] The growing challenges of discerning authentic > vs. > >>> inauthentic information and identity > >>> > >>> Basically I am interested in the intersection between politics and the > >>> internet in the context of this list, which is broader than the NN > >>> issue. So I appreciate monday conversation starters like these. > >>> > >>> In my case, I often have to revert to thinking about the present in > >>> terms of what used to be science fiction. "Interface" - upon > >>> cogitating about what the coming election will look like came to mind > >>> - https://www.amazon.com/Interface-Stephen-Bury/dp/0553572407 > >>> > >>> When I first saw the deepfakes Pr0n phenomenon a few years ago, I had > >>> my oh-ghu moment, as I realized once tools like that got into > >>> everyone's hands the truth and authenticity of any form of media begin > >>> to vanish, and the recent rise of the LLMs *almost* put the finish to > >>> it. Thankfully the LLMs (so far) have a terrible tendency to > >>> hallucinate which is often easily detectable, and overall, the > >>> technoliterati have managed to expel really bad ideas like > >>> crypto-grift, web3, and so on in the last few years. Web3 investment > >>> is down 70% this year... > >>> > >>> I now wish very much that the concept of "whuffie" existed in the real > >>> world, but the flight to mastodon, twitter's addition of community > >>> notes, most of newspapers moving to a for-pay model, and in general, > >>> the innoculation of the populace at large to distrust everything they > >>> learn on line is well underway which I find some comfort in. > >>> > >>> Promoting widespread skepticism and disbelief are powerful tools, but > >>> trying to find guidelines to what is actually truthful harder. For > >>> example, I read wikipedia's talk page on everything controversial. Too > >>> few do that. I recently sat through fox news with my mom, because her > >>> blood pressure was too low, and it served well to "improve" that, and > >>> me, take a lisinopril. > >>> > >>> Life's just a ride, tho, you know? > >>> > >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Down_and_Out_in_the_Magic_Kingdom > >>> > >>> On Wed, Jan 3, 2024 at 9:32 AM David Bray, PhD via Nnagain > >>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Dear NNAgain’ers, > >>>> > >>>> Today on a different listserv, I joined a discussion on what I sense > >> will be a pressing issue across multiple sectors in 2024. I recognize > this > >> is not NN-related and so if it isn’t of interest, I apologize in > advance. > >> However as most of us have technology background here, my sense is we > >> generally have a better sense of the looming issue than non-technical > folks > >> at the moment. Below I outline some of the contours of the evolving > problem > >> space, and invite each of you to share your thoughts as I sense the > >> diversity of perspectives here might help with brainstorming potential > >> solutions necessary for civil societies to continue: > >>>> > >>>> Premise: We are at the precipice of an extended era where > >> inauthenticity vs. authenticity will be difficult to discern, that that > >> involves multiple forms of content including biometrics and more. > >>>> > >>>> In isolated pockets, governments are becoming aware of this - however > >> it’s going to be really difficult for pluralistic societies like the > U.S. > >> where any of the Estates that traditionally would have a role to play in > >> verifying the authentic vs. inauthentic nature of something have had > public > >> trust in them as arbiters eroding. And it doesn’t help that both > politics > >> and advertisement rely on presenting things as 100% authentic when > they’re > >> often only somewhat so (or, to be more generous, mix facts with lots of > >> beliefs). > >>>> > >>>> Not supporting autocracies, however they have a bit of a “home field” > >> advantage here because there is only one singular narrative - and anyone > >> who questions it can be fired/isolated, imprisoned/disappeared, or > >> killed/executed. Tools of such regimes, to include filtering, > censorship, > >> and repression - will be used to ensure only one narrative (authentic or > >> not, mostly likely the latter) is seen by a majority of their > population. > >> Pluralistic societies will have it much harder, and the last ten years > will > >> pale in comparison to the challenges of sensemaking in a world flooded > by > >> both media and mediums of questionable authenticity. > >>>> > >>>> Back in 2019-2020, I did my darnest to connect Pablo and an additional > >> People-Centered Internet expert with Salesforce that has a lot of CRM > data > >> with the proposal that SF could provide a feature where, as part of the > >> CRM, “out of band” questions could be included to do some sort of > >> additional level of trust that the entity on the other end was who they > >> claimed to be. Unfortunately that pitch was overshadowed by larger > concerns > >> that SF’s software, give some of its features, could be misused in ways > not > >> intended by them (think about ways akin to Cambridge Analytica) and they > >> were trying to figure out how they could incorporate features to prevent > >> actors from misusing/abusing their software in ways not intended by > them as > >> a company. > >>>> > >>>> 2024 is going to be hard. Manipulation of what people appear to see, > >> hear, sense - and thus know - is becoming sadly easier. > >>>> > >>>> Meanwhile understanding of the importance of triangulation, > >> triangulation, triangulation from different perspective to discern > >> authenticity vs. inauthenticity remains time-consuming and hard. > Perhaps we > >> need to consider standing up private sector Dun & Bradstreet-like > entities > >> for identity and other important adjudicatory functions - however that > >> doesn’t immediately solve the issue of how to help the public in a would > >> experiencing a flood of questionable content, information, and > identities? > >> And who “watches” the adjudicators? > >>>> > >>>> David Bray, PhD Principal, LeadDoAdapt Ventures, Inc. > >>>> Loomis Innovation Council Co-Chair & Distinguished Fellow > >>>> Henry S. Stimson Center, Business Executives for National Security > >>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>> Nnagain mailing list > >>>> Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net > >>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> 40 years of net history, a couple songs: > >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D9RGX6QFm5E > >>> Dave Täht CSO, LibreQos > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> Nnagain mailing list > >>> Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net > >>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Nnagain mailing list > >> Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net > >> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain > >> > >