I mean, people use dash-cams protect themselves in case of a car crash, so do you think people in the future would also use body-cams protect themselves in case of being involved in a fight?

  • Gatsby@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    1 year ago

    Nah once deepfakes become simple enough for the majority to make, citizen-created video evidence will be worthless.

    Only ‘tamper-proof’ sources will be trusted even when they will be tampered with.

    • radix@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t remember if this came from cybersecurity logging practices or from anti-deepfake advice I saw online, but maybe physical cameras can constantly upload video evidence to a reliable third-party server which will save the checksums of, suppose, every minute’s worth of data. Then there would be no way for the source of the video to retroactively replace the content on that server with deepfake videography without this leaving evidence in the checksums.

      I’m not sure if/how the third-party server would be able to tell that it’s listening to a real bodycam/dashcam rather than simply receiving data from a deepfake-generating AI model. I guess to use a video for evidence, you’d have to have corroborating evidence from nearby people who recorded the same event from a different angle (AI-generated videos would have trouble with creating different angles of the same event, right?).

      And even if you can’t use a video as evidence, witness testimony has always been used in court. Someone else on Lemmy wrote that people have been making arguments in court since before there was photo/video evidence; our justice system (whoever “our” refers to) will simply revert to pre-camera ways when a photo/video cannot be trusted.

      • TotallyNotADolphin@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Another option related to the checksum solution is that camera manufactorers could implement a system on the physical camera where the raw file is tagged with some checksum/stamp and the same is stored on the device. In a situation where the validity of the photo/video in question, you could use the raw files and the physical device that captured it as the proof.

        I’m sure we will see multiple attempts to solve this, whether it be adverserial “de-fake” AIs, some physical verification or something completely different. It will be interesting to see what work and not, and what may turn out to become the standard way of verification

    • Rouxibeau@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Then some company will put out a camera that uploads all the video to the cloud with verification and makes it read only.

  • cynar@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    1 year ago

    A hackspace I am in contact with had an… interesting debate on this topic.

    Member A used a wearable video recording system. His view was that it was fixing a disability (his poor memory) in the same manner as someone wearing glasses, or a hearing aid.

    Member B was a privacy advocate. He had STRONG views on his right to not be photographed or recorded, without his permission.

    These 2 members did not see eye to eye. Both had a valid view , but diametrically opposed. Normally, it wouldn’t be too bad. Unfortunately, both were on the governing committee! Apparently even trying to arrange how to run the meetings to discuss it was getting problematic!

    • Hangglide@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      In the USA, in a public space, Member B doesn’t have a legal leg to stand on. You have no right to privacy in a public space.

      • cynar@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        This wasn’t in America, it was a private group. Also both peoples had had their views respected, at different times. It was the collision of rights that caused fun.

        Privacy advocates are quite common in hackspaces. They generally have their requests respected. The rule of thumb is to check before taking pictures of someone else, or their projects. Most don’t have an issue, but a few might want to limit some things.

  • Tordoc@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    1 year ago

    I feel the more likely scenario is for public surveillance to reach a point where everyone outside their home (or near a window) is being recorded from multiple sources.

    • user_Blue@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s already the case in neighborhoods and apartment/townhome complexes, Amazon’s Ring. Can’t walk down the street without being recorded on both sides by at least 50% of front doors / driveways. Amazon who was recently caught allowing employees to view hundreds of women’s home camera feeds (even indoor cameras, since the average person doesn’t fully consider how much a single company can spy on you when there’s a camera/microphone reporting directly to their servers).

      • Tordoc@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Very true, I forgot about the doorbell cameras! Neighbors on FB will often post their camera footage when a “suspicious” (read: black or young) person drives by

        • user_Blue@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          Sooner or later, it’ll be borderline impossible to talk a stroll without being captured on a video somewhere. I wonder how disguises/masks might evolve to counteract. And if any scene occurs, you’d better bet there’ll be at least one phone camera pointed at it.

          • eezeebee@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Look up “Justice Caps” and “Hacker Hoodie”. Infrared anti-camera apparel

      • user_Blue@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        I await the day whenever secure, self-hosted services are the norm instead of centralized, proprietary services.

        • cynar@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Humans are lazy. Having someone else set up all the details is a lot easier than doing it yourself. Until we fundamentally change the human condition, it will be a losing battle. The best we can likely do is limit the damage and reduce the difficulty of taking the better road.

          • user_Blue@infosec.pub
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            What if there happened to be an extremely determined individual who’s dream is to change “the human condition?” Sure it will be a losing battle in the beginning, but a battle fought doesn’t determine a war. Especially if it’s a war that’s been waged over our entire history. The market would also have to shift towards simple to deploy, self-hosted, free (as in freedom) open-source devices. Once everyone understands why a little effort can go a very long way, then I’m sure we can all actually change for better; for our future.

            • cynar@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              For seasoned self hosters, it’s a little effort. For novices it’s more work. For the initiated, it’s a huge effort, for no apparent gain.

              We are fighting the Nash equilibrium, and I can’t see how we can adjust it in favour of self host etc. It’s better to fight the battles we can win, than pour effort after the impossible. In this case, it’s to provide an independent option that is as low effort as possible. This can become a reference to keep the excesses of the big companies limited, to some degree.

              • Valmond@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Today it might be as much a hassle as to assemble a micro computer in the eighties, but I bet it will be one as easy as filming with your mobile phone in the future.

                • cynar@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Question for you, what percentage of people now build their own computers? It’s far less than it used to be.

        • harmonea@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Secure, self-hosted services take knowledge to set up. Everyone wants a plug-and-play solution.

          • user_Blue@infosec.pub
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            What if, over time, we focused on plug-and-play, free (freedom), open-source solutions? Take framework laptops as an example. There was a problem with laptops being difficult to self-service, so they developed a solution. Sure, not THE solution, but progress in the right direction means a lot. As long as we can recognize the faults in centralized services. (Spread relatable awareness), and care enough to support action which further develops decentralization.

  • fireshaper@social.belowland.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    I sure hope so. I just want to be able to prove to my wife she said that hamburgers were fine for dinner when she argues she never said that.

  • AshFromYourFire@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    Nothing would really surprise me. I am fascinated by that Black Mirror episode where they have cameras in their eyes and can play back anything they’ve ever seen, or download/stream for others to see. Even this seems totally plausible eventually.

  • Kempeth@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    Nah. When you look at the groups that employ body/dash cams (Police, Russian drivers, …) what they have in common is that they are involved in activities that have a high likelyhood to get you involved in altercations and it can be really important to have the incident on camera from the first second on. This simply doesn’t hold true for most people - not to a degree that warrants attaching a permanent surveillance device to your body when you already have an easily accessible on demand camera with you.

  • zephyrvs@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    After the backlash that was created by Google Glass and the clusterfucks that other hip consumer-oriented wearable cameras (like Snap’s Spectacles, Ray Ban’s and Bose’s glasses) have been, I don’t expect this to happen.

    It’s much more likely that CCTV will be so pervavise that we’re unlikely to have any expectation of privacy whatsoever, once in public and that governments and the private sector will have access to most of it.

  • audiomodder@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    I think so, but for different reasons. Dash and became popular specifically for protection. I think that AR will become so ubiquitous that we will, by default, all be wearing body cams. Once AR becomes popular enough, someone will offer an “app” that will automatically record and save the last 10 minutes or something along those lines.

  • TheFutureIsDelaware@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    Yes, because AI assistants are going to get too good to not use. And they are going to be made infinitely more powerful by being able to see and hear everything around you.

  • user_Blue@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    I think it’s possible for a self-hosted/maintained 360 degree camera to become frequently used. People in busy cities could definitely benefit from having the ability to record whoever walks up to possibly bother them. As long as this made-up product doesn’t connect to the internet, I imagine it would be practical and safe.

      • godless@latte.isnot.coffee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        Germany for one doesn’t allow them. Privacy rights of the filmed supersed rights of the filmer.

        The exception are action cams that perpetually overwrite content and only store it when an impact is detected.

      • DrQuint@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        Western Europe has a couple. Either way, I wanted one but got a lawyer telling me I’m better off not getting it, because I’d only ever be able to hand footage off for insurance and I’d better hope the incident was in private property.