kahow1107239 karma2019-08-22 13:21:25 UTC
Doesn’t this level of skepticism just enable people to deny things they’ve been witnessed by audiences of hundreds or thousands to have definitively said on live TV or during rallies? Or would you accept any video of people speaking live to large audiences as evidence?
View HistoryShare Link
kahow110784 karma2019-08-22 13:32:48 UTC
Well all I’m saying is that we can’t only accept evidence of things corroborated by the subjects of the video. People lie when it benefits them.
For example, if you required that standard for legal proceedings, nobody who was caught on video committing a crime would ever go to jail. “Did you do this thing in the video?” “No sir, that’s not me.” “Ok, not guilty!” See my point?
Plus we’d have to discount the experience of hundreds/thousands of witnesses in some cases.
kahow110736 karma2019-01-01 20:55:34 UTC
Not OP, but yes. Definitely 100% a shitlord.
kahow110729 karma2019-08-22 14:13:40 UTC
I understand how you might be skeptical of deep fakes with a private video, such as a politician in their home having a private conversation. That’s reasonable.
I’m just asking about videos that were taken in public where there were many/potentially countless people witnessing. We’re talking about fact checking public figures. Public figures are usually in the public eye. So discounting almost all videos on the basis that they could be deep fakes, unless the person in the video credits that video in some way, leads to people being able to disown things they said in public in front of an audience.
It’s just gonna create more ‘conspiracy theorists’ who see a video the public figure wants to disown and question it.
For example if Trump were to say at a rally aired live on Fox that he is an avid gardener, and then later he decided it looks bad for his image to be associated with gardening. He can simply deny it, and by this standard the video of him saying it on Fox would not be acceptable evidence that he likes gardening/said he likes gardening.
kahow110710 karma2019-03-10 19:47:52 UTC
Why did you guys cut so much of this? Was there a time limit/did you not want to make it too long, or did it just not make the cut due to lack of interest?
It sounds like there’s a ton of really good stuff that you guys didn’t include.
Copyright © 2014 BestofAMA.com, All rights reserved.
reddit has not approved or endorsed BestofAMA, reddit design elements are trademarks of reddit inc.