Surprised the 2008 Iranian missile fake didn't make it in! This was one the demo images we used to show off our forgery detection software in the early days of Inscribe before we focused in on documents as a company.

https://www.npr.org/2008/07/11/92442928/photo-of-irans-missi...

Thought it might be a fun exercise to see how little time it would take to create similar approximations of the original deepfakes using GenAI models.

https://mordenstar.com/blog/historic-deepfakes-with-ai

It was actually just yesterday when I decided youtube shorts are no longer a fun way to kill time. There's a lot of amazing stuff to watch, but it's no fun any more, because anything you see that seems amazing is likely to be AI Generated which, for me, ruins it. You're not watching videos of reality, you're basically looking at digital art at this point.

Photos, Videos, and Audio are longer "proof" of anything. Any 10 year old kid can generate basically anything he wants. I love AI, but it's sad to be living in a world where now 'Authenticity' itself is permanently dead.

What qualifies the Jennifer in Paradise photo being in there? That photo reportedly is real, even according to the description given.

It was used as a demonstration photo in a famous photo-editing program which was used to fool the world, but the image is ostensibly a real photo, not a fake image.

I agree photo manipulation has always happened, to various degrees of perfection, since the dawn of photography.

I suppose the real difference is that before it took a more artisanal, time-consuming process, and now -- increasingly -- it takes far less time to create something convincing enough. Same with video: you could fake a video, do editing, etc, but it took time, skill, a location where to shoot, etc. Now it's becoming easier to do for everyone. And it's not perfect yet, but are we sure it won't get there? And it doesn't have to be perfect anyway, it just has to fool most people in a given window of time.