Video with Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky asking to retreat and surrender their weapons was published hours ago [1].
Although I must admit the quality of the video is mediocre, the voice of the president is a little unnatural and stagy, the color of the skin of the face doesn't match, though the facial expression is not bad.
Nevertheless, here we are, deepfake video created specifically for war!<p>(PS: I'm Ukrainian and just try to be sarcastic about the whole thing which is horrific, be careful and take care)
(PS2: considering our attitude towards the situation, we're not even taking this video serious)<p>[1] <a href="https://twitter.com/_delanay/status/1504048298520371201" rel="nofollow">https://twitter.com/_delanay/status/1504048298520371201</a>
In Swedish telephone directories there used to be a section entitled "Om kriget kommer" (If there's war). Prominent among it was the phrase:<p>> Varje meddelande att motsåndet ska uppges är falskt.<p>(Every message stating that resistance has ceased is false).<p>No doubt something similar is stated in Ukraine.<p><a href="https://www.forsvarsmakten.se/siteassets/5-information-och-fakta/historia/psykforsvarets-historia/om-kriget-kommer-1961.komprimerad.pdf" rel="nofollow">https://www.forsvarsmakten.se/siteassets/5-information-och-f...</a>
It’s always a bit of a shock to remember that “photographs lie!” goes back to the very beginning of photography. See this (probably) staged war photograph from 1855 — in Crimea, of all ironic places:<p><a href="https://petapixel.com/2012/10/01/famous-valley-of-the-shadow-of-death-photo-was-most-likely-staged/" rel="nofollow">https://petapixel.com/2012/10/01/famous-valley-of-the-shadow...</a>
Interestingly Zelensky might be easier to deepfake than other world leaders because there's more footage and a wider variety of facial expressions to train on due to his acting career
The quality on this is really awful. Lighting mismatch on the neck, no atmospheric effects, voice sounds robotic, very little movement and it’s unnatural. It’s not even a useful PoC. It’s more like a meme. I think if it actually got some traction in mainstream media - like Marina Ovsyannikova’s fake Twitter account which was quoted by journos, then you could call it a legitimate first.
Voice sounds even more unrealistic than the video (source: I'm Ukrainian). No one in Ukraine would believe the audio part of this fake, even if video was perfect. This is a pathetic attempt.<p>Also, the script (the text that is being read) is written as if the target audience are Russian, not Ukrainian people (because it's based on propaganda narratives that people outside of Russia are not familiar with). This is such a poor fake from every standpoint.
The idea could also be to first post something obviously fake, in order to make everyone think, that their deep fake video tech is not addvanced enough to create really good fakes. Later they post something, where they put in maximum effort to make it seem real, having people think back to the previous fake and think: "Oh but this looks real and they are not able to produce better deep fakes than that other video."
I always find it interesting to watch the trickle down of news I find here on HN. I live in a very, very, very conservative part of the US. It always goes the same; see fake thing called out for being fake on HN. One week later, hear rumblings related to the fake thing in my community. One week after that, hear people openly talking about how that fake thing is true, but Google/MSM don't want you to hear about it.<p>Such as: Zelensky is a nazi, the Ukraine war is all CGI, anything related to Hillary or Bill Clinton (yes still), and so on and so forth.<p>Information dissemination must be similar to fluid dynamics. It just has to be.
I've seen a deep fake with Putin "surrendering" on 28th of February: <a href="https://youtu.be/ZbudZw1LlHg" rel="nofollow">https://youtu.be/ZbudZw1LlHg</a> I guess the video itself was made even earlier than that.<p>The video is not excellent, but the audio is pretty spot on, if you ask me.<p>Edit: re-worded the first sentence.
Is a deep fake asking Ukrainians to surrender an Article 37 violation of Geneva convention for perfidy?<p>I know false surrender is a crime, but using propaganda to trick the enemy into a surrender by pretending to be them, I wasn't sure.<p>I guess - is this a tool we will see more often or a tool not fit for civilized warfare?
They could definitely have done a better job. It makes me think that the purpose is not to actually fool people, but to sow seeds of doubt for future genuine Ukrainian government communications. Surely it benefits Russia for people to not trust what they see online.
We all saw this coming. Even if this instance is low-quality, eventually a similar scenario will happen with one that is good enough to fool most people. I think it is not long until official videos come with cryptographic signatures.<p>I am just realising that Star Trek: Deep Space Nine actually had a similar scenario in an episode that aired in 1998. Essentially, a deepfake of a meeting of military leaders is created in a plot to persuade a neutral nation to join a war: <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_the_Pale_Moonlight" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_the_Pale_Moonlight</a>
I'm curious about the usefulness of deepfakes in the face of 'momentum'.<p>Russia has largely been seen negatively, not just for the invasion, but also their military performance. Underdogs are popular and Ukraine's stiff resistance vs what was thought to be a vastly stronger power and they have has captured a lot of the West's enthusiasm / support.<p>Russia's propaganda about nazis, being liberators, chemical weapons, 'military operation' vs war really hasn't penetrated much of the west / just comes off as absurd.<p>With that, is a video like this likely to do much?<p>This seems like a fake that only the fakers would think would work...
People calling it looks fake are not exactly the targeted audience. My mom and dad have been countless times fooled by whatsapp forwarded videos which obviously looks fake to me but not to them. I have to explain them to look for certain clues to identify anything fake but I have been fooled countless times by videos looking legit. Captain disillusion does a good job in debunking real looking viral videos.
You're kinda late to the party - these two are over two weeks old.<p><a href="https://streamable.com/8inzvg" rel="nofollow">https://streamable.com/8inzvg</a><p><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oxVcokRghpE" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oxVcokRghpE</a>
I had an idea to do a site that verifies the authenticity of such movies, the content creator should sign the link through this site: <a href="https://movieverify.com/" rel="nofollow">https://movieverify.com/</a>
If it interests someone, please contact me, any help will be appreciated.
> the quality of the video is mediocre<p>That's generous. This video and it's audio are <i>so</i> bad, I wonder if this is a PSA, to remind people that this stuff exists, that the next one you see might also be fake.
I'm surprised this sort of thing isn't done far more widely (and better).<p>Can anyone comment on reasons why it's not more widespread? Especially in social media, where provenance is nonexistent.
Is there an easy way (online service or something) to distinguish audio deepfakes from real recordings? I'd like to check one war related audio recording.
Ban on Deep Learning is coming. It's going to be classified as a weapon and practitioners will need a background check/license to perform it.
@osynavets , not clear what you meant by<p>"Volodymyr Zelensky asking to retreat and surrender their weapons"<p>did it mean:<p>Volodymyr Zelensky asking invaders, Russia, to retreat and surrender their weapons<p>?
Now if the head didnt oscillate sideways like it wasnt connected to the neck and perhaps they used a grainy pixelated recording, they might have got away with the visuals. Cant comment on the voice recording, but so far most deepfake software isnt that good because its not aware of other variables.<p>Good laugh though, still the existence of sky fairies like god, ie something that cant be proved is still order of the day for now it seems!
Well they did one of trump and that was pretty good:
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_jrebvmPlk&t=14s" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_jrebvmPlk&t=14s</a>
I'd like to put in a request for Putin in Drag performing Lucille Ball's classic Vitameatavegamin skit, please!<p><a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/06/russia-bans-picture-of-vladimir-putin-in-drag" rel="nofollow">https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/06/russia-bans-pi...</a><p><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KY3eOtJwOhE" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KY3eOtJwOhE</a>
MIT had an interview with a Putin deepfake a while ago[0].<p>[0]: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/vladimir-putin-deepfake-mit-ai-technology-hao-li-2019-9" rel="nofollow">https://www.businessinsider.com/vladimir-putin-deepfake-mit-...</a>
That is social media for you. Disinformation still existing on there despite multiple calls to remove it.<p>Just don't straight up believe everything you see on the internet. The 'propaganda' happens on either side.