Has technology made it harder to uncover the truth or easier?

[MaxMad244]

I've been seeing a lot of videos and pictures on the internet of things and then I'll read a caption that it's xyz or yzl but int ruth it could be CGI or pictures of someone else, or someone in a different place. There is really no way for me to verify what I'm seeing. Sure, I could trust someone who is well versed in machine learning to verify the picture is unedited, or even a forensic expert, and in many cases they do, but the volume of information is so fast and high that it would take 10.10^1000 power people to verify everything.

In a way, it's become far easier, in my view, to create an illusion than it is to tell what is real. I mean at some point we will be able create a video of someone saying and doing anything which is indistinguishable from the real person to the naked eye, or a machine sans quantum computing.

At what point do you draw the line? Or do you see it the other way around? Cause I could post a picture of myself in the middle of Manhattan but really be in Australia and I've made ones that seem so real no one can tell except for a machine.

 

[Patches]

It's really dependent upon how proficient you are with the internet, how well you understand it. How well you understand how to vet sources. If you fall into this category, it's an absolutely incredible source of knowledge.

Unfortunately, insufficient internet literacy is a very pervasive and damaging problem. In part, because a large portion of the population grew up in a world without the internet. Also, a lot of early education programs fail to teach young people adequate internet literacy and are way behind in instituting technology education. If you fall into this category... It is understandably a confusing place, and the accessibility of information becomes significantly harder.

Education is key here.

 

[MaxMad244]

It's really dependent upon how proficient you are with the internet, how well you understand it. How well you understand how to vet sources. If you fall into this category, it's an absolutely incredible source of knowledge.

Unfortunately, insufficient internet literacy is a very pervasive and damaging problem. In part, because a large portion of the population grew up in a world without the internet. Also, a lot of early education programs fail to teach young people adequate internet literacy and are way behind in instituting technology education. If you fall into this category... It is understandably a confusing place, and the accessibility of information becomes significantly harder.

Education is key here.

I've seen falsified photos taken as real by millions and millions of people from all spectrums. So I see what you're saying but I think it's a matter of timing. I don't think anyone is a sentinel or robot that just knows what's real.

Recently there have been pictures circulating around taken as recent when in fact they are from as far back as 2012 by all news sources.

I think it's too insidious to methodically tear through it. But I get your point.

 

[Maou]

It is becoming more and more simple to "fake" and create illusions due to technology. You are not wrong.

The people saying its easy are far too confident in themselves based on prior knowledge, and probably are not aware of the advancement in technology in the last 10 years alone. The existence of "Deep fakes" is concerning. The only real way to see through illusions and photoshop... you cannot just rely on old school methods. You have to use common sense. Far too many people are believing in things because it's from an "official" channel as well, rather than questioning. It isn't unheard of for well known organizations, or people to fake things. I've personally seen it in the media, where they reuse pictures, or scenes to cover a current story. Photoshopping people's appearance has never been new, nor has faking/acting entire things scenarios. Yes, it will gradually become so difficult, you won't be able to tell apart reality from fiction.

 

[Hawk]

This has been a long time issue really.

I think this is a song that says it all but you have to think about it:

To me technology is our downfall. It causes dependency, and lack of accountability. It reduces ethics and takes away from learning experiences with life.

Over time I have seen TV change from an entertainment tool to a member of the family to a tool for programming the masses. George Orwell made that clear too.

I have seen computers go from productivity tools to entertainment tools to (insert path of tv here) to enslavement devices. Now you have to buy and sell by computers. God help someone if they have to transact cash in person. Everything has a computer in it.

Personally I think the future is clear and it isn't the technology it's self. It's the fact people decide it's critical to their existence so they give up their humanity for it.

It will enslave is forever, we are almost there. And we will have one man very soon who will rule all by way of it.

Tell me we don't have that forming at NATO right now.

And tell me it isn't fortold Biblically.

(And I have worked over 30 yrs in technology)

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

It's really dependent upon how proficient you are with the internet, how well you understand it. How well you understand how to vet sources. If you fall into this category, it's an absolutely incredible source of knowledge.

Unfortunately, insufficient internet literacy is a very pervasive and damaging problem. In part, because a large portion of the population grew up in a world without the internet. Also, a lot of early education programs fail to teach young people adequate internet literacy and are way behind in instituting technology education. If you fall into this category... It is understandably a confusing place, and the accessibility of information becomes significantly harder.

Education is key here.

This is where I stand.

Particularly, Chicago Public Library has a wealth of information available online (not just e-books, either) and I'm sure this is the case for the public libraries of many other large cities.

 

[The Cat]

 

[ceecee]

 

[Julius_Van_Der_Beak]

Neither do birds, so I've heard.

 

[LightSun]

I've been seeing a lot of videos and pictures on the internet of things and then I'll read a caption that it's xyz or yzl but int ruth it could be CGI or pictures of someone else, or someone in a different place. There is really no way for me to verify what I'm seeing. Sure, I could trust someone who is well versed in machine learning to verify the picture is unedited, or even a forensic expert, and in many cases they do, but the volume of information is so fast and high that it would take 10.10^1000 power people to verify everything.

In a way, it's become far easier, in my view, to create an illusion than it is to tell what is real. I mean at some point we will be able create a video of someone saying and doing anything which is indistinguishable from the real person to the naked eye, or a machine sans quantum computing.

At what point do you draw the line? Or do you see it the other way around? Cause I could post a picture of myself in the middle of Manhattan but really be in Australia and I've made ones that seem so real no one can tell except for a machine.

For those who are not disciplined and sticking to peer reviewed articles and accredited sources, the truth can be hidden and camouflaged.

People will believe every conspiracy theory known to be existing. A rhetorical question, “How can people in this day and age believe in the flat earth theory?”

Upon Facebook I have a picture album and my ‘Note of Wives Tales and False Positivisms.’ What the reason is, I am not cognizant, many persons utilize internet without accredited source material. They buy in and believe.

Then we have politicians who use all manner of cognitive distortions. This isn’t partisanship. There were certainly more qualified Republican candidates than Mr. Donald Trump.

This man has no shame. He lies through his teeth. When he said, “I have something on President Obama that will be an eye opener in regarding his citizenship.” Mr. Trump had none, yet their are followers of this bona fide narcissist. He meets the criteria.

I am an idealist and to my way of thinking our highest elected officials and the media should adhere to higher standards of reason, facts and no usage of glaring thought distortions.

I know longer watch the news. It’s a propaganda show. MSBC is Liberal biased. Fox is Conservative Biased. I admire Rachel Madow. She is an intelligent woman with witty intelligence.

Nonetheless I expect stick with objective fact. Rachel exclaims, “The Republicans are doing this…” There is to much emotional reasoning, generalizations, labeling and name calling.

Fox is an offense. Bill O’Reilly, yes he’s an intelligent man. He too just as Rachel uses all manner of subjective distortion.” LightSun

 

[mikomiko]

Technology can help to discover the future

 

[The Cat]

Or occlude the reality of the present.

 

[The Cat]

And now we meet in an abandoned studio
We hear the playback and it seems so long ago
And you remember the jingles used to go
Oh-a oh-a
You were the first one
Oh-a oh-a
You are the last one
Video killed the radio star
Video killed the radio star
In my mind and in my car
We can't rewind, we've gone too far...

 

[MaxMad244]

Technology has made it easier in some contexts and harder in other contexts resulting in a net wash. The primary function of human perception is not to observe the truth but to systematically delineate between that which allows the person to survive and that which results in death without reproduction.

Therefore technology could not have improved or impeded the truth. It can only transform a net balance which cannot be added to or subtracted from...

But of course you will argue otherwise since your perception isn't based on reality but rather on improving your ability to survive.

And conflict is big business. Lot of money to be made selling weapons to both the winning and the losing teams. A lot of gas too.