Tech has come a long way since Monty-Python style JibJab from 2004.
Waiting for the Tencent version of this. It feels like Tencent releases a new model or two every single week. If they do release an equivalent, everyone will be able to clone Viggle's entire product offering.
Models are becoming commodity faster than ever these days. We had five foundation video models come out last week. I don't know how Runway ML, with their $300M of fundraising, will be able to stay ahead or raise again. They don't have any special magic, and there's nothing spectacular about their product.
I wouldn't want to be a foundation model company these days. China and any third string company release weights openly to gain network effects and salt the earth for foundation model value accretion. Product and brand awareness are all that matters.
Edit: if anyone from Alibaba or Ant Group is reading, can you release your code and weights? Pretty please?
No doubt! I'm surprised people even remember JibJab.
And paper documents are still being used on court today despite being trivially counterfeit.
Why so? Because court never trust documents blindly, the defendant can always object that it is fake and try and question their origin. If the concerns are deemed legitimate by the court, the document is going to be rejected (and an investigation will occur and the producer of the fake document will be charged heavily).
From my experience juries are not smart, but if you can show them they've been lied to they will destroy the side that lied to them, not to mention the punishments for lawyers that try to use AI technology to obtain verdicts in their favor by deception.
This sounds insulting but it is intended to be a frank statement.
In 4 years of working cases I would estimate 1 in 6 jurors are above the 85-115 IQ range of average intelligence, and maybe half are at or below the 100 line.
Add in that anyone over the age of 55 is on average far more susceptible to deepfake technology simply because they don't have the life experience and perceptual skills needed to discern the tells in the video, and you have a recipe for disaster.
If you are in court and your opponent might use fabricated video evidence against you, you better hope that your jury is younger or that your lawyers and judges have the expertise needed to expose any deepfake technologies like this for what they are, or you might be cooked.
Maybe I'm missing the joke, but isn't IQ meant to follow a normal distribution with a mean/median of 100 with a standard deviation of 15, in which case you'd expect half of jurors to be below 100 and ~15% to be above 115, which is pretty close to what you've seen?
As it is, it seems like it might help for video editing and VFX. Being able to isolate out a human being lets you do all sorts of editing with less issues that can then be composited over later for a final shot.
Convincing older people that their children/relatives are in jail/hospital/kidnapped and need money
Disinformation/chaos by faking important speeches by politicians
Fake celebrity endorsements of products and causes
Rewriting historical events with "newly uncovered" footage
Other creative ways of ripping people off and lying
I do wonder what the end game here would be. A race to the bottom where any televised speech is brought into question. I wonder if that would destabilize all power bases to the point that people will finally look at the actions of their politicians rather than their words. Wishful thinking perhaps.
Since we live in a social media age, anything that looks "really cool" has basically immediate commercial applications. Even that phrase should set alarm bells off.
Beyond the obvious commercial implications with video content, 2 more use-cases I can think of quickly are:
- disabled people able to communicate more fluidly
- trans people able to express themselves more freely
I imagine some opensource player will try to recreate their model themselves too.
