DeepFaceLab: A tool that utilizes ML to replace faces in videos

https://github.com/iperov/DeepFaceLab

by wawhal • 7 years ago

347 175 7 years ago

github.com

s_Hogg• 7 years ago

What are the non-malicious uses for something like this? Haven't actually got around to pondering that yet.

m12k• 7 years ago

Personalized meme gif generation? Send your friend a gif with their face on Bruce Lee to tell them they are kicking ass

mc325• 7 years ago

“Joke” apps, so you can put yourself in a video as a hero heroine, villain villainess. Put yourself as a singer or whatever on a music video, etc.

Punking your friends too.

In a productive context in filmmaking you can have fun with doubles and stuntmen and stunt women. Or if you have the rights to license the face and likeness of an actor actress and they can be in five films, ten films in a year (forgetting about brand dilution). John Wayne can be in a new Western movie,

ebg13• 7 years ago

Punking your friends too.

"Punking" does not qualify as non-malicious.

Oras2• 7 years ago

already there and its called Zao https://twitter.com/AllanXia/status/1168049059413643265

Mic92• 7 years ago

Seems useful for memes?

amq• 7 years ago

It could be useful for film production where you could replace the stuntman's face with the real actor's one.

guerrilla• 7 years ago

And replace the low paid actor's face with a high paid actor's face...

AnIdiotOnTheNet2• 7 years ago

This has been routine in films since at least Jurassic Park (1993).

bsenftner3• 7 years ago

Doing exactly this, replacing stunt doubles, is what I wrote and acquired a global patent back in '08. I tried to create a personalized advertising agency: put people into the advertisements themselves, driving the new car, wearing the new fashions, taking the luxury vacation. Problem was, I started my effort in '04, had a working pipeline by '08 - but none believed it was possible. Even when I'd demonstrate right in front of them, investors thought it was a trick. I eventually went bankrupt and quit. Today, we have deepfakes, where we could have had personalized adverting a decade ago.

nelsonic• 7 years ago

Agree that this feels like a tool for malicious intent. But, maybe reviving dead celebrities or family members? Either way this tech seems inevitable, nerds showing off their skills to other nerds.

Next question: does it make CCTV footage obsolete as a form of permissible evidence in court?

phs318u• 7 years ago

If you had hardware that generated per frame signatures using PK encryption? Private keys and hardware can be compromised but at least it raises the bar and weeds out casually malicious actors. Having said that, I have no idea if such devices exist nor how they might work.

antisemiotic• 7 years ago

Porn.

dominotw2• 7 years ago

haha obvious answer.

TulliusCicero• 7 years ago

Putting your own face (or a friend's face) into a movie or TV show.

Or going the other way, use a real video of your friend and replace their face with a famous actor.

DMcVeigh• 7 years ago

An interesting use could be to anonymise people in public videos. You could use randomly generated faces (which other emerging tech can produce) and effectively remove peoples recognizable features by "replacing" them.

cj• 7 years ago

That’s interesting. I wonder if that would be sufficient to forgo the typical release forms required when filming in certain public places.

chris5745• 7 years ago

Reminds me of the anonymizing suits in “A Scanner Darkly”.

BurningFrog2• 7 years ago

An alternative to blurring could be useful.

But who should they look like?

Maybe that spot could be sold...

rohan_shah2• 7 years ago

Politicians and celebrities are all about their faces. They wouldn't allow for anonymizing their footage even though the 'bad' guys will want to exactly use their faces on fake videos for exactly the same reasons.

derivagral• 7 years ago

On a network like FB that has your photos, mix your own face into the advertisement! The video can have the pre-computed target, and the network can generate yours from all that free photo storage/tagging...

zawerf• 7 years ago

My initial reaction is that this counts as malicious.

But thinking about it some more, I at least don't mind clothing ads using me as the model. (Assuming there's opt in and all)

It's better than mentally swapping out the skin tone and body type to see if it was really the clothes that looked good or the attractive model.

tyingq• 7 years ago

Standing in for me for many tedious videoconference meetings :)

krasin• 7 years ago

Privacy. A commercial video shot in public today is usually required to blur faces of people who didn't give explicit consent. Replacing faces with stubs is a nice alternative, as long as the target face is from a person with a consent.

I am not a lawyer, though.

gchadwick• 7 years ago

Replacing faces with stubs is a nice alternative, as long as the target face is from a person with a consent.

Why use a real face? You could generate a fake one using a GAN. You may even be able to build a fully automatic anonymize tool that can identify the broad characteristics of each face present (skin tone, age, male/female etc) then use that to generate replacement faces.

jobigoud• 7 years ago

Maybe it could be coupled with GAN generated faces.

golergka• 7 years ago

Habituating people to the fact that this exists, therefore lessening the impact of malicious uses.

mkr-hn• 7 years ago

I could see someone using it to update home movies after transitioning. Dysphoria is probably not great for reminiscing.

divbyzer0• 7 years ago

Localisation of films\tv shows\educational material.

Often English language films are poorly dubbed for local (mostly non-English speaking) markets. Having a local/recognisable actor filling the role would be a big improvment.

mc325• 7 years ago

That’s a little more complicated. Now you’re replacing a face and body and either having them voice dialogue separately (dubbing themselves) or you’re putting a local face to a foreign film (and subbing?)

I can see them modifying the actual original actor to speak in a local language however to sync with the localized dialogue.

That said, your proposition is also interesting. It raises some questions though. Imagine an indie French film where the protagonist (or whoever) gets replaced by a Hollywood actor. Or an indie Angolan film which gets the treatment. There would be lots of purists (for many reasons) protesting this kind of option.

sakopov• 7 years ago

I recently watched a Deep Fake video of The Shining with Jim Carrey's face over Jack Nicholson's. It was so damn good you couldn't even tell it wasn't actually him playing the role. This was all fun and games, but one thing that immediately comes to mind is movies staring people who are no longer alive.

tashoecraft• 7 years ago

I’ve been telling people that there will now always be new movies with Tom Hanks. Even after he has passed, there’s so much screen time to use and audio recordings that he could forever be in new movies.

BurningFrog2• 7 years ago

Imagine if when you click up a movie/show on Netflix, you get to pick which actors play the main parts.

Angostura• 7 years ago

Grand Moff Tarkin says hello.

scarmig• 7 years ago

Famous actors could license their face for use. This could even last past their death, allowing them to star in movies decades after their flesh death.

If an actor dies while filming a movie, it can be required in the contract that they allow their face to be generated for scenes that haven't been filmed yet.

They could also use this to use a younger face as they age.

fawak• 7 years ago

I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that Stan Lee's face had been scanned like crazy before his death in order to keep the cameos going.

bitL2• 7 years ago

As a part of a pro movie making suite like AfterEffects or DaVinci Resolve - you can take somebody else to act in a scene and then replace with physique of your chosen actor, e.g. you do stunts, your actor can't appear at a given geographic location at a given time, somebody had a facial injury/scars you want to get rid of etc. Plenty of valid uses. Then you could e.g. do a render in Blender and replace "avatars" with real human faces, avoiding "uncanny valley" in your animation.

Travel industry can have uses as well - these days many places offer video recordings of their clients doing some dangerous activity; for those that can't do them yet still want the video they could offer pre-baked scenes where taking a selfie could kill somebody and then replace their face/body with some green screen footage of their client using this app and some pose estimator/body switcher. Or just show you how much would you enjoy some beach property in some hot location with a video featuring you etc. This would make it useful for custom ads featuring you as well.

martin-adams• 7 years ago

Storytelling of historical characters where we have common knowledge of what they looked like (e.g. Einstein).

Reshooting scenes of movies without having to get key actors back on location.

Immersive storytelling where you get to be placed inside a movie.

Actor safety where they can go through transformations for a shoot, such as extreme weight loss or weight gain.

I can really only think of it in terms of entertainment. There may be some therapy benefits which are yet to get discovered, but I would imagine that's a whole new level of complexity.

JoeAltmaier5• 7 years ago

Presenting yourself online (think Skype) as more symmetrical, more imposing, more pleasing. For business advantage while negotiating.

deftnerd• 7 years ago

* See what you look like in a certain outfit being put through its paces. A stock video of a bride walking down the aisle or dancing in a dress could have the real bride's face put in place so the bride can visualize how she'll look in different situations.

* A demo video of what life in a new house would be like. Pre-recorded video featuring actors waking up, eating breakfast, and living life in a home could have the actors replaced with the potential home buyers.

* Security tests... for facilities that have to look for "banned" people, occasionally a face could be replaced on the video to see if the security guard notices. This is similar to the TSA sometimes testing workers by putting in fake images of guns or bombs into the X-Ray display to make sure their workers are actually paying attention.

* Retroactively correcting visual media that is no longer appropriate. I would love a version of "The Cosby Show" where Bill Cosby was replaced by another famous black actor just because it would trigger my liberal guilt less. This could allow studios to craft contracts where if a star committed a grievous act or if they die, their likeness could be replaced throughout the series and they would stop receiving royalties for their visual appearance. Dialog could be re-dubbed as well to complete the retroactive continuity.

* Updating low-res video... If there is a very poor and grainy interview with someone, the image might be able to be enhanced more completely by replacing the subjects face with a higher resolution copy of their own face!

* Smart therapy mirrors... people who have had disfigurements or have body image problems could have a smart mirror that displays a modified image for either self-esteem purposes or to help them psychologically.

* Same applies for funhouse/haunted house mirrors... seeing a mirror image of yourself with a zombie-ified head would be a great illusion.

* Real-world facial masking... You know how people can 3d map the exterior of a building and then project an image onto it using that 3d map taken into account to pull off some spectacular illusions? [1]

Something similar, sans holographic technology, could be done to make someone appear like someone else. A camera and 3d scanner environment to track the facial contours and location, with a projector projecting the image of another face onto the real face. Similar to the scene in Bladerunner 2049 where the AI girlfriend rents a real-world avatar for a personal encounter with her boyfriend. [2]

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XSR0Xady02o

[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VuV2c-6js8w

heeen• 7 years ago

https://youtu.be/2ZKPnuUFwOk?list=PL84DB158CAABE4E07&t=633

https://youtu.be/KH1V6CHO1Jk?list=PL84DB158CAABE4E07&t=388

MayeulC2• 7 years ago

I see a lot of concern regarding fake pornographic videos. And I get it. But on the other hand, people could release videos they do not want to appear in with a credible alternative to blurring faces (though I guess you could still fingerprint facial expressions).

If this gets mainstream enough, "revenge porn" would also lose a lot of its current value, being easily dismissible as "fake". (And so would genuine photographical evidence...)

Journalists could use it to hide their sources from the public. If this gets reaaly good, it would become a nice alternative to motion capture for cinematography (pose estimation, including facial expressions). Then swap in the 3D model, or concept art of the person you want to appear on screen. Significantly reduce the costs for makeup, and enable more in post-prod. That was probably already available for big teams with big budgets, but this makes it more mainstream.

dominotw2• 7 years ago

Movies/Media with you, your friends and family as the cast?

Personalized entertainment.

craigsmansion• 7 years ago

Replacing all those hacks and pretenders in every movie ever [1] with the glory that is Nicolas Cage.

1. including "Face off"

wait-a-minute• 7 years ago

Deep analysis of the body for any visible signs of tumors or diseases. Stroke detection software. Home and car entry without needing to carry any keys. Much faster entry into airports, where we need passports or security checks anyway. Lots of entertainment possibilities.

boilerupnc• 7 years ago

First Person Artist Museum experiences [1]

[1] https://www.dezeen.com/2019/05/24/salvador-dali-deepfake-dal...

[EDITED]

jcims• 7 years ago

I got a good laugh out of this one - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1kJO_L9gr5Y

probably only funny if you watch these folks regularly

bsenftner3• 7 years ago

Personalized adverting: see yourself / your family using/enjoying products you're yet to purchase. Cars, clothing, trips...

JoblessWonder2• 7 years ago

A different git repository has a "manifesto" of sorts explaining why they think it is ethical to release:

https://github.com/deepfakes/faceswap#faceswap-has-ethical-u...

rohan_shah2• 7 years ago

I thought of a non-malicious use.

Celebrities could sell the 'rights' to their faces and then ordinary people could 'act' in commercials and later on even movies and then just stick the face of the celebrities?! xD Celebrities will become cheaply available to 'star' in your next Netflix series.

(But unfortunately, even if celebrities don't sell their faces, they'll be stolen!)

TrackerFF• 7 years ago

Say you need to replace an actor in a movie. Great potential there

costcopizza• 7 years ago

I think the cons are going to heavily outweigh the pros with this tech.

Fake news on high octane race gas.

MayeulC2• 7 years ago

Well, I also like the facts that:

* Everyone can access it. Not just sophisticated actors anymore

* It might make us rethink the entire "truth" chain, on how we source our information

Of course, the two go hand-in-hand, but the latter point is overdue: while video is perhaps more glaring, it's something that's needed in a lot of other areas as well (text -- news articles, messages, mail; sound -- phone calls, etc; image -- photoshop, though we start to get used to it).

cowpig• 7 years ago

Everyone can access it. Not just sophisticated actors anymore

Why do you like this?

skybrian• 7 years ago

What's good about letting every script kiddie use it? I'm thinking, the less usage the better?

I agree that provenance could become more important, but I don't see it changing how memes spread. For a lot of people it's just entertainment and they don't care whether it's true.

lawlessone• 7 years ago

Beyond trivial amusement what are the Pros?

eismcc• 7 years ago

Stunt doubles?

cactus2093• 7 years ago

I don't know that it makes sense to isolate just the narrow concept of deep fake creation. It seems like fundamentally a lot (most?) of the breakthroughs that make creation of deep fakes possible are the same ideas that make possible the current state of the art for classification, decision problems, advanced NLP, and other things we call ML or AI.

So to do this pro/con analysis you probably need to include the pros of these related technologies as well, which are certainly more than trivial amusement.

drusepth2• 7 years ago

I'm using this for the second half of letting authors generate fake faces for their fictional characters and then putting those faces on top of video snippets from actors. I'm still in the exploratory stages of what all is possible/useful, but feedback so far has been generally positive ("characters feel more real", "easier to empathize", "super interesting potential").

Could also make for some interesting low-budget book commercials/trailers where authors (or I guess anyone making a video starring people) can design the characters in a video without worrying about what actors are available and/or what CGI costs.

dfsegoat• 7 years ago

I know that DARPA is one Govt. agency in USA looking at this from the disinformation & media forensics standpoint:

https://www.nextgov.com/emerging-tech/2019/08/darpa-taking-d...

https://techcrunch.com/2018/04/30/deepfakes-fake-videos-darp...

...The consensus seems to be that ongoing detection is going to be a challenge as the tech evolves. I suppose that is like anything though....

bitL2• 7 years ago

Ads featuring you instead of an actor - do you want to see how well these clothes are fitting you? How would you like to be slim again? Here is your hair back! This supplement makes you look like the Terminator! Here is a regular day at your new property! All featuring you!

If you think this won't attract huge investments from VCs, you are likely too optimistic.

ortusdux• 7 years ago

Ads asking camera permissions. Sends a chill down my spine

goolulusaurs• 7 years ago

It would go a long way towards making many kinds of blackmail difficult or impossible, which seems like a pretty big upside.

momokoko• 7 years ago

Photoshop has existed with the ability to modify images kn this way for over a decade.

Can you think of many recent examples of video evidence was the sole evidence in a news report?

paggle2• 7 years ago

Some pros:

Bereavement. It won’t be for everyone, but perhaps some people who have lost loved ones might like to feel that they are still alive by bringing them into modern day videos.

Fantasies. You hear about how some people like to live out fantasy lives in video games. I heard one about a severely disabled teen or young man who gets to be a big strapping strongman in his favorite video game. Imagine an old lady who can create a video of herself at age 25 free soloing El Capitan by deepfaking herself into an Alex Honnold video.

larryjustin2• 7 years ago

Prior to the invention of the photograph, people were forgotten. I don't think that was a bad thing. Our brains weren't designed to retain all family member from all time. Also, why? Why would we need that? I don't care to see a family member from 4 generations ago walking to the refrigerator in some video.

No, this tech will be used to amuse and/or influence the intellectually challenged.

Oras2• 7 years ago

Is it the same technology used by Zao? The example in the gallery does not look as good as the video here https://twitter.com/AllanXia/status/1168049059413643265

throwawaywego• 7 years ago

I think this tech is too complex to run on mobile devices in 8 seconds for video transfer from 1 selfie.

What I think Zao does is preprocess the videos (manually or highly accurate facepoint detection). They pre-calculate the transforms (standard facemorphing algorithms with opacity/alpha tweaks), and shading depending on the scene lighting. Then they just need a good frontal selfie, or do some frontalization, and keypoint detection, and the rest can be rendered/computed without much resources, following a pre-defined script.

If more advanced than facemorphing, then perhaps something more like: https://github.com/facebookresearch/supervision-by-registrat... (pre-fitting a 3D face mask, then texturing it with your selfie)

JoblessWonder2• 7 years ago

Yeah, I think the big question is if Zao only allows pre-selected "scenes" that they have already done the processing on or if they allow you to upload any video.

From the results, I think you are exactly right in how they are accomplishing those videos.

puranjay2• 7 years ago

Video evidence is going to be inadmissible very soon.

It's ironic that we're essentially being pushed back to a pre-technology, pre-media time. "If you didn't see it with your own two eyes, you can't believe it"

CabSauce• 7 years ago

It'll be the same as anything else. An approach to fake something will be created. Then an approach to identify the fakes... and repeat.

roywiggins• 7 years ago

Video evidence has always required testimony to its provenance, hasn't it? Otherwise it can be removed as hearsay. Courts have always been worried about authenticating evidence including video.

https://jamespublishing.com/2013/objecting-video-audio-evide...

https://www.esquiresolutions.com/federal-rules-catch-digital...

vectorEQ• 7 years ago

videos can be altered in this way for a long long time now. just not by neural networks. so in reality, it changes nothing.

briffle• 7 years ago

But does the average juror understand that? In the future, when each of them has had their face transplanted on top of Chevy Chase or Beverly D'Angelo for some e-greeting for Christmas Vacation on Facebook, maybe they will stop trusting it.

simias2• 7 years ago

It does change a whole lot. Up until a few years ago you'd only have to be suspicious of very important videos coming from people who have access to convincing video editing. Some video coming from the USA, Chinese or Russian government trying to disprove war crimes? Yeah, better be careful. Some guy using damcash footage to prove the other driver was in the wrong? Not so much.

As the technology improves and becomes accessible soon anybody will be able to edit videos convincingly without having to invest a massive amount of time or money. That's going to have a large impact I think.

tzm• 7 years ago

Reducing technical complexity changes everything.

mikojan• 7 years ago

People have been convincingly altering pictures since forever. I could do it no problem when I was 14.

Nothing changes.

ISL• 7 years ago

Were you fourteen in the era of digital image processing, or in the darkroom?

It was always possible, but it used to be far more difficult.

randyrand• 7 years ago

thankfully, video evidence is still rare in most cases even today, and was practically nonexistent 20 years ago.

AnIdiotOnTheNet2• 7 years ago

"If you didn't see it with your own two eyes, you can't believe it"

Given what we know of human memory and visual processing, you'd be a damned fool to trust your own eyes any better.

puranjay2• 7 years ago

I was just thinking about that. Knowing what we know about memory manipulation now, there is no real objective truth anymore

joering2• 7 years ago

A little story of admission of evidence I heard from a friend of my wife when I gave her ride home recently.

We listened to Sirius 117 thru our ride and they always tell crime stories. It was a death row story and when the narrator said that the only evidence they had against a suspect was a DNA but it was enough to put him on electric chair, she chuckled a little. It was odd so I asked her why. As a court reporter she witnessed many horrors written by life, but this one was particularly scary for another reason. She was reporting on a case where the only evidence of a murder was a DNA, even though a suspect was in New York on a day where victim was murdered in Los Angeles. The DA rested case explaining that DNA evidence is enough and holds up in courts for many years and that they do not need to explain anything else, how he go from NY to LA at the night of murder or really nothing else mattered "because of DNA." So defended lawyers ran a suspect DNA via one of popular DNA-kit websites and to their surprise they found a good enough match. She was lucky to be called in when the case was heard again (most of the time different court reporter would be called in depending of availability) and they showed that result to DA/prosecutors asking if they would consider prosecuting based on that person DNA. They look at it and said it was the same person DNA. So defended lawyers revealed that it was different person. To judge shock, then DA came to say that DNA match doesn't have to be 100% and over the span of human existence some 100 billion people lived so its quite possible for extremely similar DNA to be found in wild. She recalls looking at judge face at that moment and he turned pale blue - you couldn't help to see this man wondering if over the span of last 2 decades, he may have sentenced hundreds of people based on inadequate evidence. The case did not ended there but shortly after when she was checking on it, the whole case all of sudden got sealed and even year later was still locked down. All she knows is that most likely he wasn't found guilty, as checking on his name recently did not yield any record on Cali's death row list.

So so much of DNA being of 100% proof.

localhost2• 7 years ago

I wonder what this implies for the future of media (audio, photos, video) in general? Do we only consume media that has been signed by the creator and verified by an authority that we trust, e.g., a "blue checkmark" for media? Do we know how effective the SSL certificate verification has been in browsers at influencing consumer behavior?

plopz• 7 years ago

Do we know how effective the SSL certificate verification has been in browsers at influencing consumer behavior?

Considering how EV is essentially dead, I would assume it hasn't been very effective.

brightball2• 7 years ago

We do know that people don't care about trust indicators. They care about warnings for danger, but they don't care about trust indicators. Trust indicators are essentially, something for companies to sell.

Because everybody isn't going to pay for the trust indicator and we're going to consume plenty of things that don't have it, the indicator is basically just noise. It's why EV failed and we're about to see it repeat with this BIMI technology in the email world IMO.

On the other hand, if you get a big giant danger warning that stands out because everything else doesn't have it...it gets attention.

localhost2• 7 years ago

While I agree that a giant danger warning will get attention, it also implies that someone needs to be the arbiter of "danger". And given how eagerly the giant Internet co's have embraced being gatekeepers, I don't hold out a lot of hope for this approach.

mc325• 7 years ago

It’s gonna have to be better than a blue check mark.

A blue check mark only says this account/person has our imprimatur. Nothing more.

There are people who don’t have who are better disseminators than those who have them.

That would be terrible. Basically it would turn media into versions of Xinhua or former Pravda. Only approved voices and opinions get the “authenticity” mark.

RandallBrown4• 7 years ago

In Neal Stephenson's latest book, that seems to be how he gets around the fake news problem.

The near future world signs everything with a personal identifier so they can prove they what people are seeing is genuine.

I imagine these identifiers could be extended to things like security cameras and things too so that there could be some verification that the video footage hasn't been doctored.

All of this of course relies on the general public getting the knowledge and tools to seamlessly do this verification on a daily basis. In the book it's mostly taken care of using google glass style wearables.

EForEndeavour• 7 years ago

For anyone else not up to date, Neal Stephenson's latest novel is Fall; or, Dodge in Hell: https://www.nealstephenson.com/fall,-or-dodge-in-hell.html

slg2• 7 years ago

The primary problem with fake news is not that people are fabricating evidence. Sure, that does happen on occasion but it is relatively rare and is usually debunked pretty quickly. The biggest issue is that there are sources that can't be trusted and consumers don't have the skills or tools to identify those untrustworthy sources or simply don't care that their sources might be biased. Fixing the first problem (which is all some type of signing certificate could hope to do) doesn't accomplish much if we can't also addresses the second problem.

riku_iki• 7 years ago

I read that current camera manufacturers already have some e-signature code inside cameras, but it is hackable..

skizm• 7 years ago

Is the new book any good? I heard bad reviews, and it turned me off. I usually love everything NS does though.

wuliwong• 7 years ago

The ability to fake photos has been around for a while and it hasn't been a big deal. People overall have proven savvy enough to mostly discern real from faked. My prediction is that the same will be true for ML faked videos.

air72• 7 years ago

That's what I thought too until I saw The Shining staring Jim Carrey.

https://youtu.be/HG_NZpkttXE

tonylemesmer• 7 years ago

For quite a while and probably still now, advertising photos were/are routinely doctored without people realising (e.g. fashion or makeup models). This was a scandal a few years ago certainly in the UK. The outcome was for plus size models to be more frequently featured. So in some cases it can go unnoticed and be a serious problem.

hombre_fatal• 7 years ago

Besides, look at how many reddit submissions are just an image of a headline, or an image of a picture + caption. Not even a link to a source. Yet thousands of upvotes and reactions to it, taking it at complete face value.

To worry about fake photos/videos seems out of touch with the current state of the internet. People will upvote and bicker about a screenshot of the text of a tweet. Why even bother with ML when an image of an outrageous sentence is enough?

koonsolo3• 7 years ago

I have the same feeling, but if you look at photo's, they've been edited for decades (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_of_images_in_the_So...).

Photo editing became "household" at least a decade ago. So if you think of that, I can't see why the perception of video's in 3 years would be different than photo's today.

luiscosio• 7 years ago

There is also:

https://github.com/deepfakes/faceswap

With a big development community and interesting results.

InfinityByTen2• 7 years ago

Deep Fake with its revenge porn wasn't enough to give this a second thought?

kevingadd• 7 years ago

Researchers and prototyping engineers generally don't seem concerned with ethics or consequences these days. Hard to be sure whether it's due to a pressure to publish or interest in chasing fame/revenue but there's lots of stuff like this being published lately. Even if some researchers opted not to chase this down there are always more people looking to push the boundaries.

The natural conclusion goes past revenge porn to revenge videos of beheadings, murders, etc that can be sent to friends or family members who aren't technically savvy enough to recognize fakes for what they are. Not to mention the existing phenomenon of blaming random civilians for murders and terror attacks - this will be far more convincing when it's paired with convincing fakes. It'll probably claim some lives.

nefitty2• 7 years ago

Is innovation supposed to pause for society to catch up every time something drastic is created or discovered?

jonplackett• 7 years ago

On a scale of 1 to 10, how much easier does this make Deepfakery?

jonnismash• 7 years ago

This technology has been posted on HN before and the comments were all too similar to this one. I understand why a lot of people are falling into the FUD-hole, but we can pretty easily solve the issues mentioned in the comments by inserting a digital key - similar to a SSL certificate, into an image/video upon initial upload. Or even upon creation, maybe using some sort of ledger to verify integrity. I'm not too worried.

michaelmior• 7 years ago

What does that verify? Assuming they key hasn't be compromised, it does verify that the holder of the key uploaded a file at a particular time. It still doesn't show that the video itself is genuine. Although it does seem to allow us to fall back on the trustworthiness of the source which is better than nothing.

cmroanirgo2• 7 years ago

I used to work for a company who provided verifiable audio and video (virtually in the pre digital days) mainly for law enforcement. I remember discussing how it'd be done in digital: a constant stream of verification (eg a hash of the last second) all encoded by a key. It's pretty much how the analogue version worked. I'm sure (if they're still around) that'd be what they're doing.

Animats• 7 years ago

Hollywood has been doing this for a while, for stunt performers. Sometimes well, sometimes badly. We'll be seeing more of that as it works better.

As for the political implications, go watch "Wag the Dog" again.

spaniard_dev• 7 years ago

Am I the only one that cries when seeing non PEP8 compliant Python code? Why do data scientists mistreat Python that way?

topranks2• 7 years ago

You are the only one.

gallerdude• 7 years ago

I'm surprised no one's bringing up the precedent of photoshop. For years we've culturally realized that pictures may not tell the whole story, and this is the exact same, down to results that can't quite escape the uncanny valley.

lorepieri• 7 years ago

On a (somewhat) related note, I'm working on face recognition with homomorphic encryption, therefore without compromising the user privacy. The bold goal is the first privacy preserving videocamera. If you find this interesting, I would love to chat about it.

noteness• 7 years ago

I'd love to hear more about it & see the code.

DeepFaceLab: A tool that utilizes ML to replace faces in videos

Related Stories