Add new comment
I have some reservations regarding this technology. I file it under the Jurassic Park heading that, just because you can clone dinosaurs doesn't give your the moral right to actually go ahead and do it. Don't get me wrong. I'm all about new technology, new technology trends, and I'm generally in favor of any technology or gadget that is a tool that will make my life easier. Not every tool or gadget invented is for me, or for my use, nor am I the target audience, but generally speaking if it assists then I like it. GPS on my cell phone is a great example. Saves on ink and paper printing out those driving directions.
That, however, isn't this. There is a moral implication. As a culture we generally rely on visual evidence. The NFL, MLB, and NHL all have their own challenge rules for controversial plays because they want to get the call correct. We rely on the visual evidence. Traffic cameras. Security cameras. All designed to remove "beyond a reasonable doubt" that an event happened. However, what if you didn't say what you said? What if that video has been altered? What happens irrefutable evidence becomes refutable? (See also: Star Trek TOS: Court Martial.) What happens then?
This technology has bad news written all over it. Similar to that of a B-movie where an actor states, "We can't let this technology fall into the wrong hands." People often consume technology, and by that I mean they appropriate it to make it their own well beyond what it was originally intended. (I doubt the original intention of the Internet was to create a vehicle for pornography.)
Yes, this technology has bad news all over it. As if there aren't already enough hoax links floating around the inter-webs. That's coming from someone who isn't necessarily an alarmist. Judge for yourself:
- (via TechCrunch) This system instantly edits videos to make it look like you’re saying something you’re not: http://techcrunch.com/2016/03/18/this-system-instantly-edits-videos-to-make-it-look-like-youre-saying-something-youre-not/