Mediaboss Marketing

Media playback is unsupported on your device

"We are already at the point where you can't tell the difference between deepfakes and the real thing," Professor Hao Li of the University of Southern California tells the BBC.

"It's scary."

We are at the computer scientist's deepfake installation at the World Economic Forum in Davos which gives a hint of what he means.

Like other deepfake tools, his software creates computer-manipulated videos of people - often politicians or celebrities - that are designed to look real.

Most often this involves "face swapping", whereby the face of a celebrity is overlaid onto the likeness of someone else.

As I sit, a camera films my face and projects it onto a screen in front of me; my features are then digitally mapped.

One after the other the faces of actor Leonardo DiCaprio, former UK Prime Minister Theresa May and footballer Lionel Messi are superimposed onto the image of my own face in real time - their features and expressions merging seamlessly with mine.

The effects, while impressive, are more comical than sinister but feasibly could confuse some viewers. However, when the professor shows me another deepfake video he has been working on which is yet to be unveiled to the public, I totally understand what he means.

It shows a famous world leader giving a speech and is impossible to distinguish from the real thing.

"Just think of the potential for misuse and disinformation we could see with this type of thing," says Prof Li.

Deepfakes only hit the headlines in 2017 after crudely produced videos began to surface on the internet, typically involving celebrity face swapping or manipulation.

Some were send-ups of well-known figures, voiced by impressionists or comedians. But in the vast majority of cases, famous people's faces were superimposed onto those of porn stars, much to the alarm of those targeted.

Since then the technology - which relies on complex machine learning algorithms - has evolved rapidly and deepfakes have become more common. Some have been used as "fake news". Others have been cited in cases of online fraud. Facebook has even banned them from its platform for fear they could be used to manipulate people.

Prof Li's own software was never designed to trick people and will be sold exclusively to businesses, he says. But he thinks a dangerous genie could be about to escape its bottle as deepfake technology falls into the wrong hands - and democracy is at threat.

"The first risk is that people are already using the fact deepfakes exist to discredit genuine video evidence. Even though there's footage of you doing or saying something you can say it was a deepfake and it's very hard to prove otherwise."

Politicians around the world have already been accused of using this ploy, one being Joao Doria, the governor of Sao Paulo in Brazil. In 2018 the married politician claimed a video allegedly showing him at an orgy was a deepfake - and no one has been able to prove conclusively that it wasn't.

However, the greater threat is the potential for deepfakes to be used in political disinformation campaigns, says Prof Li. "Elections are already being manipulated with fake news, so imagine what would happen if you added sophisticated deepfakes to the mix?"

So far clips such as the one of Ms Pelosi are not hard to spot as fakes. But done subtly, he says, people could put start to words into the mouths of politicians and no one would know - or at least by the time it was corrected it would be too late.

"It could be even more dangerous in developing countries where digital literacy is more limited. There you could really impact how society would react. You could even spread stuff that got people killed."

But some, like the Dutch cyber security firm Deeptrace, which tracks the technology, feel the panic over deepfakes has been overblown.

Director Giorgio Patrini says it is relatively easy to pull off a convincing deepfake when the person being mimicked is someone you don't know. But if they are a politician or celebrity familiar to millions it's much harder. "People are just too familiar with their voices and facial expressions," he tells the BBC.

"You would also need to be able to impersonate their voice and make them say things they would credibly say, which limits what you can do."

In addition, while he accepts the most sophisticated - and dangerous - deepfake tools are freely available in open source on the internet, he says they still require expertise to use. "That's not to say they won't become more widely commodified and accessible, but I don't think it'll happen so quickly. I think it will take years."

Nevertheless, Mr Patrini thinks indistinguishable deepfakes will become commonplace eventually and could be used as a serious political weapon.

Offering a taste of what this might look like, Facebook in December removed a network of more than 900 fake accounts from its platforms that allegedly used deceptive practices to push right wing ideology online.

Notably, the accounts had used fake profile photos of fake faces generated using artificial intelligence.

Both Prof Li and Deeptrace have created deepfake detection tools, although they admit cyber criminals will work tirelessly try to get around them.

However, Mr Patrini is optimistic: "Even when deepfakes are so sophisticated humans cannot tell the difference, I believe we will be able to build more sophisticated tools to spot them. It's like anti-virus software - it will keep being updated and improved."

Follow this link:
Deepfakes: A threat to democracy or just a bit of fun? - BBC News

His speech will go down in history as proof that we stood up to the assault on what is right and true.

| 2:15 PM

If you havent already, I encourage you to put aside nine minutes to watch Representative Adam Schiffs closing remarks from Thursdays Senate trial.

Schiff began by stating the obvious: the facts prove that Donald Trump is guilty as charged. We all know it. But the question remains as to whether he should be removed from office. Schiff makes the case that Trump should be removed because he has demonstrated that he will choose his own personal interests over protecting our national interestswhich makes him dangerous.

At that point, I was reminded of the warning Michael Cohen gave to Congress last year.

The Republican Senators sitting in that chamber are determined to be loyal to a president who always puts his own interests over those of others. They should listen to Michael Cohens warning that, the more people that follow Mr. Trump as I did blindly are going to suffer the same consequences that Im suffering.

After pointing out the threat Trump poses, Schiff ended with this.

If right doesnt matter, it doesnt matter how good the Constitution is

If right doesnt matter, were lost.

If truth doesnt matter, were lost.

The framers couldnt protect us from ourselves if right and truth dont matter.

You cant trust this president to do whats right for this country.

This is why, if you find him guilty, you must find that he should be removed. Because right matters. And truth matters. Otherwise we are lost.

Those incredibly eloquent words speak to what many of us are experiencing as we watch the crisis in our country unfold. Wedont hold out much hope that either right or truth matter to the Republicans sitting in that chamber, which is why we recognize that it is not simply Donald Trump that poses a threat to our country. Jennifer Rubin pointed to the strand of hope we hang on to.

We can hold out hope that Schiffs magnificent words will resonate with Americans, if not with a majority of the Senate. Perhaps Schiffs call to our better angels will provide the emotional lift and inspiration to banish Trump from the Oval Office in the November election. Whether they do or not, Schiffs words will serve as a message in the bottle a love letter to democracy and truth for future generations.

As the House managers made their case in the Senate trial, even the most hardened cynics that I follow on Twitter have noted the way that Representative Adam Schiff has risen to this occasion. It is a testament to the fact that great leaders dont emerge based simply on their own individual merits, but are called upon when what they have to offer is exactly what is needed during a crisis.

Given the intransigence of Senate Republicans, there are no facts or evidence that will change their minds. Similarly, there are no words that are so eloquent as to dissuade them from their current course.

However, led by Schiff, the House managers have articulated the evidence in a way that leaves no doubt about Trumps guilt. Schiff ended on Thursday night by composing a love letter to democracy and truth that will go down in history as proof that we refused to become collaborators in the assault against what is right and true.

If you enjoyed this article, consider making a donation to help us produce more like it. The Washington Monthly was founded in 1969 to tell the stories of how government really worksand how to make it work better. Fifty years later, the need for incisive analysis and new, progressive policy ideas is clearer than ever. As a nonprofit, we rely on support from readers like you.

Yes, Ill make a donation

See the original post:
Schiff Closes With a Love Letter to Truth and Democracy - Washington Monthly

Regardless of whether youre watching every minute of coverage, or just the highlights, the Senate impeachment trial of Donald Trump is coming across as two different events.

The House managers prosecuting the articles of impeachment against Trump charging that he abused the power of the presidency to cheat in the 2020 election, then obstructed Congresss investigation of the same are engaged in, or are attempting to engage in, an actual trial.

You know: evidence, witnesses, facts.

The presidents defense team is performing for Fox News and other conservative media outlets. There is no discussion of evidence, witnesses or facts, just a recitation of blustery talking points, grade-school deflections, legalistic doublespeak and Trumpian conspiracies. Its all recycled material.

The House managers evidence is recycled, too its a summary of the case they built during the impeachment inquiry.

This is a show trial, pure and simple, in which Republicans stated goal is to exonerate the defendant.

The House managers very much want to provide senators with new information, by putting witnesses with first-hand knowledge on the stand, people such as John Bolton, Mick Mulvaney, Mike Pompeo, Mike Pence and Trump himself.

It stands to reason that a man as confident of his innocence as Trump would be eager to get all the evidence out there and clear his name, right? It stands to reason that the senators sworn to judge the presidents guilt would want the same thing, right?

Wrong.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, and his merry band of quislings, know that Trump is guilty. Thats why they want this proceeding over as quickly as possible. To call it a trial, as Ive argued, is disinformation. This is a show trial, pure and simple, in which Republicans stated goal is to exonerate the defendant.

The moment hes acquitted, we know Trump will immediately crow about his glorious exoneration, because his entire brand is based on impunity the idea that he is powerful enough to say and do whatever he wants without consequence.

This exoneration, in turn, will establish a new precedent: for Trump himself, and all future presidents. They'll forevermore be able to pressure a foreign government to dig up dirt on opponents, freely subvert our elections and block Congress from investigating them.

This behavior will no longer be abuse of power. It will become standard operating procedure.

In a sense, the GOP senators will be ratifying the lesson ofthe 2000 election (which George W. Bush won only because the Supreme Courts conservative majority voted to halt the recount in Florida), of the weapons of mass destruction hoax that lead to the war in Iraq, and of theSandy Hook slaughter of 26 people, including 20 first graders. In each of these situations, Republicans faceda choice. They could either cling to power or faceaccountability. In each case, theychose power.

The only way to repudiate this culture of sociopathic nihilism and lawlessness is for citizens of good faith to become more politically active.

The transformation of Trump from party pariah a man Lindsay Graham called a kook a loser and a race-baiting, xenophobic, religious bigot-- to a de facto monarch is the inevitable culmination of this moral rot. Any time you ignore what could become an evil force, Graham observed four short years ago, you wind up regretting it. These days, Graham isnt ignoring that force. Hes become its loudest defender.

Now Trumps Republicans will be on the record for all of eternity.

And for what? To prop up a corrupt and cruel grifter whom most of them despise and mistrust. The only thing greater than their shame, apparently, is their shamelessness. They needed Trump to find that shamelessness. Thats what hes given them and all it cost them was our constitutional democracy.

The only remaining remedy is the 2020 election, an election already besieged by voter suppression, gerrymandering and the perverse math of the Electoral College and, thanks to Mitch McConnell, foreign subversion, too.

The only way to repudiate this culture of sociopathic nihilism and lawlessness is for citizens of good faith to become more politically active. We can, and should, watch what's happening on the floor of the Senate in despair and outrage.

But each of us who feels that distress has a duty to act.

If you care about our democracy, make your plan.

Follow Cognoscenti on Facebook and Twitter.

Excerpt from:
The Impeachment Trial Is The End Of Democracy As We Know It - WBUR

According to the EconomistIntelligence Units Democracy Index 2019, Estonias democracy scores slightlydeclined in 2019, making the country fall behind the United States.

In the 2019 DemocracyIndex, compiled by the Economist Intelligence Unit, a British business withinthe Economist Group providing forecasting and advisory services throughresearch and analysis, Estonia is a flawed democracy with the score of 7.90in 2019. In 2018, Estonia scored 7.97, which shows a small decline.

And, in 2018, Estoniaranked higher than the United States, which in both 2019 and the year beforescored 7.96. In the overall index, Estonia is ranked 27th, just behind Maltaand ahead of Israel.

The good news is,however, that in Eastern Europe, Estonia scores the highest and is ranked thefirst. The scores for the Baltic states moved closer together, as Estonia theleader saw confidence in political parties decline, while Latvia the laggard saw the share of women in parliament increase. Estonia remained thehighest-ranking country in eastern Europe, with a score of 7.90 and a globalranking of 27th, the Economist Intelligence Unit noted in its report.

The most democratic country in the world, according to the index, is Norway, followed by Iceland, Sweden and New Zealand. Finland is ranked fifth, Ireland sixth, and Denmark and Canada share the seventh spot. Australia and Switzerland finish up the top 10.

Lithuania is ranked 36th with the score of 7.50 (tied with Slovenia); and Latvia 38th with the score of 7.49. Poland is ranked 57th and Russia (classified as an authoritarian regime) ranks 134th, alongside with Congo.

Altogether, there are22 full democracies in the world, 54 flawed democracies, 37 hybrid regimes and54 authoritarian regimes.

In 2019, some 68 countries experienced a decline in their total score compared with 2018, but almost as many (65) recorded an improvement, the report pointed out. The other 34 stagnated, with their scores remaining unchanged compared with 2018.

Three countries(Chile, France and Portugal) moved from the flawed democracy category to beclassified as full democracies. Malta moved in the opposite direction,falling out of the full democracy category to become a flawed democracy.

According to themethodology of the index, the countries that are full democracies must have thedemocracy score higher than eight; flawed democracies greater than six and lessthan or equal to eight; hybrid regimes greater than four and less than or equalto six; and authoritarian regimes are scored less than or equal to four.

A full democracy is a countryin which not only basic political freedoms and civil liberties are respected,but which also tend to be underpinned by a political culture conducive to theflourishing of democracy. The functioning of government is satisfactory. Mediaare independent and diverse. There is an effective system of checks andbalances. The judiciary is independent and judicial decisions are enforced.There are only limited problems in the functioning of democracies.

A flawed democracy, under which Estonia falls, is a country that also has free and fair elections and, even if there are problems (such as infringements on media freedom), basic civil liberties are respected. However, there are significant weaknesses in other aspects of democracy, including problems in governance, an underdeveloped political culture and low levels of political participation.

According to theEconomist Intelligence Units measure of democracy, almost one-half (48.4%) ofthe worlds population live in a democracy of some sort, although only 5.7%reside in a full democracy, down from 8.9% in 2015 as a result of the USbeing demoted from a full democracy to a flawed democracy in 2016. Morethan one-third of the worlds population live under authoritarian rule, with alarge share being in China.

The report also notedthat in 2019, the average global score for democracy fell from 5.48 in 2018 to5.44. This is the worst average global score since the index was firstproduced in 2006, the report said. The 2019 result is even worse than thatrecorded in 2010, in the wake of the global economic and financial crisis, whenthe average global score fell to 5.46.

The Economist Intelligence Unit is a British business within the Economist Group providing forecasting and advisory services through research and analysis, such as monthly country reports, five-year country economic forecasts, country risk service reports, and industry reports.

Cover: Democracy Index 2019 map.

Continue reading here:
Estonia's democracy score slightly declines; falls behind the US - Estonian World

Ten years ago, in January 2010, the Supreme Court released its disastrous Citizens United decision. The court, either through remarkable naivety or sheer malevolence, essentially married the terrible idea that money is speech to the terrible idea that corporations are people.

The ruling put a for sale sign on our democracy, opening up a flood of corporate, special interest, and even foreign money into our politics.

Through Citizens United and related decisions, the Court made a bad situation worse. We saw the proliferation of super PACs, which can accept and spend unlimited amounts of money to influence elections, and the rise of dark money, which is undisclosed political spending that can come from any special interest, including foreign countries.

One-fifth of all super PAC donations in the past 10 years have come from just 11 people.

In the 10 years since the decision, theres been $4.5 billion in political spending by outside interest groups, compared to $750 million spent in the 20 years prior to the case.

From 2000-2008, there were only 15 federal races where outside spending exceeded candidate spending. In the same amount of time following Citizens United, this occurred in 126 races. Now, almost half of all outside spending is dark money that has no or limited disclosure of its donors.

That money isnt coming from the farmers suffering through Donald Trumps trade war or the fast-food workers fighting for a living wage. Its coming from the wealthiest donors, people often with very different priorities than the majority of Americans. In fact, a full one-fifth of all super PAC donations in the past 10 years have come from just 11 people.

This has led to an unresponsive and dysfunctional government. With so many politicians in the pockets of their big donors, its been even harder to make progress on issues like gun safety, health care costs, or climate change.

Not to mention, were left with the most corrupt president in American history, whos embroiled in a series of scandals that threaten our prosperity, safety, and security.

SCROLL TO CONTINUE WITH CONTENT

Get our best delivered to your inbox.

To name just a few of these scandals: Trump urged a foreign country to investigate his political opponents. His lawyers associates funneled money into Trumps super PAC through a sham corporation. The National Rifle Association spent tens of millions of dollars in unreported dark money to elect him while allegedly serving as a Russian asset.

Trump and his accomplices should be held accountable, through congressional impeachment, the judicial process, or both. But we also need meaningful anti-corruption reforms.

Thanks to a class of reformers elected in 2018, weve already begun that process. Last year, the House of Representatives passed the For the People Act (H.R. 1).

H.R. 1 would strengthen ethics rules and enforcement; reduce the influence of big money while empowering individual, small-dollar donors; and, along with a bill to restore the Voting Rights Act, protect every Americans right to vote. It also calls for a constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United.

Sadly, this bill is being blocked by Mitch McConnell in the Senate.

These reforms are all popular with the American people. We can unrig the system and restore that faith by fighting for these priorities, and by pressuring elected officials to act. Join groups like End Citizens United or Let America Vote to push back against our rigged system and put people ahead of corporate special interests.

Together, we can restore trust in government, prevent corruption, strengthen our national security, and ensure Washington truly works for the people.

More here:
Citizens United: The Court Ruling That Sold Our Democracy - Common Dreams