[NNagain] The growing challenges of discerning authentic vs. inauthentic information and identity

[David Bray, PhD]

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 <david at 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 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 at 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 <nnagain at lists.bufferbloat.net>
> >>> To: Network Neutrality is back! Let´s make the technical aspects heard
> >> this
> >>>     time! <nnagain at lists.bufferbloat.net>
> >>> Cc: Dave Taht <dave.taht at gmail.com>
> >>> 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
> >>> <nnagain at lists.bufferbloat.net> 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 at 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 at lists.bufferbloat.net
> >>> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Nnagain mailing list
> >> Nnagain at lists.bufferbloat.net
> >> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain
> >>
> >
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/pipermail/nnagain/attachments/20240108/1287f50b/attachment-0001.html>