Regarding their "responsible" model, Meta's engineers aren't stupid. They know that:<p>1. No TTS audio output is tamper-proof. Their "safeguards" will be busted, and quickly. Whether via a small adversarial NN, some basic DSP, or just...holding a cheap recorder near your speakers, maintaining audio file provenance has <i>no</i> chance.<p>2. Impersonations have vexed humanity since <i>the invention of vocal cords</i>. Insofar as it's soluble, it's been solved -- authenticity is determined by a fluid mixture of context, trustworthiness, and the authority of involved parties & institutions. Always has been. Always will be. If I could drill one idea deep into every tech evangelist's head, it'd be: <i>The solution to every problem isn't automatically "more technology."</i> But hammers see only nails, so the vicious cycle continues, and society deals with the consequences (e.g. cryptobros decentralizing money...by slowly reinventing banks, but with more fraud).<p>3. This secret audio ID "feature" is probably <i>harmful</i>. It adds needless complexity. At best it exacerbates a false sense of safety because impersonation is trivial. Bad guys can emulate it on authentic recordings to discredit them as "fake." Nobody who'd actually benefit from such safeguards will respect them. News says this audio that affirms my confirmation bias is fake? Nah, the news is fake.<p>Meta knows all of this. Optimistically, I hope it's just lip service to concern fetishists; plausible deniability for the knife manufacturer when a bad guy uses one. Pessimistically, it might be pretext for an about-face on their OSS commitment. "Oops, researchers trivially broke our safeguards. Shucks. That's scary. Guess we'll build a moat instead of an OSS community. Think of the children or terminator or whatever works these days"<p>I suppose we'll see.