From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ej1-x633.google.com (mail-ej1-x633.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::633]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D7B8A3CB38 for ; Mon, 8 Jan 2024 21:52:38 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-ej1-x633.google.com with SMTP id a640c23a62f3a-a294295dda3so271076366b.0 for ; Mon, 08 Jan 2024 18:52:38 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1704768757; x=1705373557; darn=lists.bufferbloat.net; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=T8igZE6acsQnt0OvAGC5Mg7HyQ/oRSaDRN6ONtaTFy4=; b=CLOw+RIF2qffAQy3yCtlxLtU36etyroV+C4hVA+F97lrDxwtGdMhVoB5lpfXeWyZwl tLFU7K17XC/h3MY9aYeUpYOpRDd5/nORqVR6R9SlRNjzjQ9BDEaYr6g0+RT7uFhoTmfo wm1+/GkbkaQFsI1HlVv42YwsatCiZ2qs2ihdAX6xBkfyktEOPo2x5l4NBQVSMt0mISxQ 13LNu9p8kcgXzwCkA5hM4ekApK1ZH7VN1QTikxm75Gy1z3tliK0qVE30l6Ph/0N3EBsL 9x67hKqGi3QM4JSUEomZ2qp6ElEKML2Q2AmnNWmWd0CY0pzuOkAdxM92h5w4ozvgTr5p mnbg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1704768757; x=1705373557; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=T8igZE6acsQnt0OvAGC5Mg7HyQ/oRSaDRN6ONtaTFy4=; b=gLsFwTJNevGohBS6lI+bxOXjp8bEkHiO0LnQ+cW01WwO6jnaoeqTOSdI8zzhVWNEL/ 4dRZrZb3iJB/tYYkYFR6o0KaUByTRJrF/YX986TM7vafpqBFZmT12xOihEY1GqqV6XSx OvRZq8JskBcuGsk9E3A4UR3d6wSTZL/5kp8yg/DOWCxl+tUI6g6gd8ywbH1mpYeeGbxd CSCDsak5N6VsyG5QYMZLqhLKSwHycx761e8Gk5vUfF3bo98TUaj66k2sm4Kt3u0D0uZJ xW0o3FwXGluuC7S2LNSOWRpYphESfEvxJwMwrTp5WDJCzEQv3dLuBU6kioHzb8f9A4UM pZjg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzxoQ7URoj7XueTblB4hRB2WjaISGvQ+bVwM1KtLT+0c3kymIe6 lRqhLvFYOCpdn6RGWlyUlAEFKxO9Rdx7yYUPC1wTZOX8wsA= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFNUcrZx8jaMQzle2o+UVmlnVUlKKWc4gcbtRNjwdrXgw51Itj/WF82O4gMO5dzRMXMvh1CwVxgmn/eZv0jHZ8= X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:a384:b0:a26:c9b9:3f89 with SMTP id k4-20020a170906a38400b00a26c9b93f89mr78451ejz.226.1704768757473; Mon, 08 Jan 2024 18:52:37 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: "David Bray, PhD" Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2024 21:52:01 -0500 Message-ID: To: David Lang Cc: =?UTF-8?Q?Network_Neutrality_is_back=21_Let=C2=B4s_make_the_technical_asp?= =?UTF-8?Q?ects_heard_this_time=21?= Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000036a6e9060e7a687f" Subject: Re: [NNagain] The growing challenges of discerning authentic vs. inauthentic information and identity X-BeenThere: nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: =?utf-8?q?Network_Neutrality_is_back!_Let=C2=B4s_make_the_technical_aspects_heard_this_time!?= List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2024 02:52:39 -0000 --00000000000036a6e9060e7a687f Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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=E2=80=AFPM 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 bee= n > > 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 signin= g. > > 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=E2=80=AFPM 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=C2=B4s 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 th= e > >>> 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 begi= n > >>> 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 rea= l > >>> 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. To= o > >>> 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=E2=80=AFAM David Bray, PhD via Nnagain > >>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Dear NNAgain=E2=80=99ers, > >>>> > >>>> 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=E2=80=99t 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 tha= t > >> involves multiple forms of content including biometrics and more. > >>>> > >>>> In isolated pockets, governments are becoming aware of this - howeve= r > >> it=E2=80=99s going to be really difficult for pluralistic societies li= ke 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=E2=80=99t help that bo= th > politics > >> and advertisement rely on presenting things as 100% authentic when > they=E2=80=99re > >> often only somewhat so (or, to be more generous, mix facts with lots o= f > >> beliefs). > >>>> > >>>> Not supporting autocracies, however they have a bit of a =E2=80=9Cho= me field=E2=80=9D > >> advantage here because there is only one singular narrative - and anyo= ne > >> 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 addition= al > >> 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 th= e > >> CRM, =E2=80=9Cout of band=E2=80=9D questions could be included to do s= ome sort of > >> additional level of trust that the entity on the other end was who the= y > >> claimed to be. Unfortunately that pitch was overshadowed by larger > concerns > >> that SF=E2=80=99s software, give some of its features, could be misuse= d in ways > not > >> intended by them (think about ways akin to Cambridge Analytica) and th= ey > >> were trying to figure out how they could incorporate features to preve= nt > >> 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=E2=80=99t immediately solve the issue of how to help the public = in a would > >> experiencing a flood of questionable content, information, and > identities? > >> And who =E2=80=9Cwatches=E2=80=9D 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=3DD9RGX6QFm5E > >>> Dave T=C3=A4ht 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 > >> > > --00000000000036a6e9060e7a687f Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Yes - however folks who do bad things rarely sign tha= t they did bad things... so how do we tackle bad actors?

On Mon, Jan 8, 2024 at 9:30=E2=80=AFPM David Lang <david@lang.hm> 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 perso= n did (or
> did not do) something. Sadly we know eyewitness testimony actually is<= br> > replete with errors... which is why heretofore "roll the video ta= pe"
> (you're at least a Gen X'er or older if you recall video tapes= ) has been
> what courts relied upon:
> https://www.scientificamerican.c= om/article/do-the-eyes-have-it/
>
> What do we do if that's now questioned? Watermarking of photos, au= dio, and
> videos can be overcome - and, sadly, may actually super-empower either=
> surveillance states or authoritarian states to "control" med= ia. 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=E2=80=AFPM David Lang via Nnagain <
> nna= gain@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 fe= w companies'
>> is
>> not going to work. There will need to be some sort of decentralize= d
>> reputation
>> system where you can pick who you trust
>>
>> Yes, some people will chose to trust people who feed them fakes. T= hat is
>> better
>> than giving any one entity the ability to declare anything as &quo= t;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 <nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net><= br> >>> To: Network Neutrality is back! Let=C2=B4s make the technical = aspects heard
>> this
>>>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0time! <nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net>
>>> Cc: Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com>
>>> Subject: Re: [NNagain] The growing challenges of discerning au= thentic vs.
>>>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0inauthentic 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 th= e NN
>>> issue. So I appreciate monday conversation starters like these= .
>>>
>>> In my case, I often have to revert to thinking about the prese= nt in
>>> terms of what used to be science fiction. "Interface"= ; - upon
>>> cogitating about what the coming election will look like came = to mind
>>> -=C2=A0 https://www.amazon.c= om/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<= br> >>> 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 fi= nish 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 inve= stment
>>> is down 70% this year...
>>>
>>> I now wish very much that the concept of "whuffie" e= xisted in the real
>>> world, but the flight to mastodon, twitter's addition of c= ommunity
>>> notes, most of newspapers moving to a for-pay model, and in ge= neral,
>>> the innoculation of the populace at large to distrust everythi= ng they
>>> learn on line is well underway which I find some comfort in. >>>
>>> Promoting widespread skepticism and disbelief are powerful too= ls, but
>>> trying to find guidelines to what is actually truthful harder.= For
>>> example, I read wikipedia's talk page on everything contro= versial. Too
>>> few do that. I recently sat through fox news with my mom, beca= use her
>>> blood pressure was too low, and it served well to "improv= e" 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=E2=80=AFAM David Bray, PhD via Nna= gain
>>> <nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Dear NNAgain=E2=80=99ers,
>>>>
>>>> Today on a different listserv, I joined a discussion on wh= at I sense
>> will be a pressing issue across multiple sectors in 2024. I recogn= ize this
>> is not NN-related and so if it isn=E2=80=99t of interest, I apolog= ize 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-techni= cal folks
>> at the moment. Below I outline some of the contours of the evolvin= g problem
>> space, and invite each of you to share your thoughts as I sense th= e
>> diversity of perspectives here might help with brainstorming poten= tial
>> solutions necessary for civil societies to continue:
>>>>
>>>> Premise: We are at the precipice of an extended era where<= br> >> inauthenticity vs. authenticity will be difficult to discern, that= that
>> involves multiple forms of content including biometrics and more.<= br> >>>>
>>>> In isolated pockets, governments are becoming aware of thi= s - however
>> it=E2=80=99s going to be really difficult for pluralistic societie= s like the U.S.
>> where any of the Estates that traditionally would have a role to p= lay in
>> verifying the authentic vs. inauthentic nature of something have h= ad public
>> trust in them as arbiters eroding. And it doesn=E2=80=99t help tha= t both politics
>> and advertisement rely on presenting things as 100% authentic when= they=E2=80=99re
>> often only somewhat so (or, to be more generous, mix facts with lo= ts of
>> beliefs).
>>>>
>>>> Not supporting autocracies, however they have a bit of a = =E2=80=9Chome field=E2=80=9D
>> 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, cens= orship,
>> and repression - will be used to ensure only one narrative (authen= tic or
>> not, mostly likely the latter) is seen by a majority of their popu= lation.
>> Pluralistic societies will have it much harder, and the last ten y= ears will
>> pale in comparison to the challenges of sensemaking in a world flo= oded by
>> both media and mediums of questionable authenticity.
>>>>
>>>> Back in 2019-2020, I did my darnest to connect Pablo and a= n 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 o= f the
>> CRM, =E2=80=9Cout of band=E2=80=9D 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=E2=80=99s software, give some of its features, could be mi= sused in ways not
>> intended by them (think about ways akin to Cambridge Analytica) an= d they
>> were trying to figure out how they could incorporate features to p= revent
>> actors from misusing/abusing their software in ways not intended b= y them as
>> a company.
>>>>
>>>> 2024 is going to be hard. Manipulation of what people appe= ar 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. P= erhaps we
>> need to consider standing up private sector Dun & Bradstreet-l= ike entities
>> for identity and other important adjudicatory functions - however = that
>> doesn=E2=80=99t immediately solve the issue of how to help the pub= lic in a would
>> experiencing a flood of questionable content, information, and ide= ntities?
>> And who =E2=80=9Cwatches=E2=80=9D the adjudicators?
>>>>
>>>> David Bray, PhD Principal, LeadDoAdapt Ventures, Inc.
>>>> Loomis Innovation Council Co-Chair & Distinguished Fel= low
>>>> Henry S. Stimson Center, Business Executives for National = Security
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Nnagain mailing list
>>>> Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net
>>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinf= o/nnagain
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> 40 years of net history, a couple songs:
>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DD9RGX6Q= Fm5E
>>> Dave T=C3=A4ht CSO, LibreQos
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Nnagain mailing list
>>> Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net
>>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nn= again
>> _______________________________________________
>> Nnagain mailing list
>> Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net
>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagai= n
>>
>
--00000000000036a6e9060e7a687f--