Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(YouTube)   The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Schwarzeneggers   (youtube.com) divider line
    More: Amusing  
•       •       •

1922 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 29 Jun 2020 at 6:05 PM (11 days ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



36 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2020-06-29 1:59:57 PM  
Video fails without the Ah-nold voice. Someone desperately needs to bad-lip-read over this.
 
2020-06-29 6:07:34 PM  
I see your Schwarzeneggers is nearly as large as mine, subby.
 
2020-06-29 6:09:44 PM  

WoolyManwich: Video fails without the Ah-nold voice. Someone desperately needs to bad-lip-read over this.


You haff my swo-ord.
Und you haff my bow.
Und my achxe.
 
2020-06-29 6:16:39 PM  
Get your ass to Mordor.
 
2020-06-29 6:23:38 PM  
He is indeed the pahty poopah.
 
2020-06-29 6:27:18 PM  
What determines the quality of the deepfake?  The number of images fed into the algorithm?  The ability to detect angles?  It seemed to drop off numerous times.  Is it just a matter of letting it crunch numbers long enough?
 
2020-06-29 6:29:56 PM  
Now do that with the Uruk-Hai
 
2020-06-29 6:34:50 PM  

DeathByGeekSquad: It seemed to drop off numerous times


It's usually when they're in the middle-distance, or when they turn their heads to profile. There was a lot of work here, so any small discrepancies could be forgiven
 
2020-06-29 6:37:06 PM  
i.pinimg.comView Full Size
"He is too powerful!"
 
2020-06-29 6:42:30 PM  
That was disturbing and honestly, I've seen much better deep fakes.
 
2020-06-29 7:57:29 PM  
Arnold of the nine fingers
And the ring of doom
Why does he have nine fingers
Where is the ring of DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMMMMMMM
 
2020-06-29 8:06:28 PM  
So, are we going to have to start discounting video and photographic evidence? Seriously.
 
2020-06-29 8:10:15 PM  

almejita: So, are we going to have to start discounting video and photographic evidence? Seriously.


Michael Crichton wrote about this nearly 30 years ago.
 
2020-06-29 8:13:25 PM  

FrancoFile: almejita: So, are we going to have to start discounting video and photographic evidence? Seriously.

Michael Crichton wrote about this nearly 30 years ago.


Ya, but it's happening now.  Losing the ability to produce photographic evidence seems huge to me, but if anyone can put my face on Pia Zadoras body, well, fark that.  Especially if Pia is committing a robbery at the time.
 
2020-06-29 8:17:02 PM  

almejita: FrancoFile: almejita: So, are we going to have to start discounting video and photographic evidence? Seriously.

Michael Crichton wrote about this nearly 30 years ago.

Ya, but it's happening now.  Losing the ability to produce photographic evidence seems huge to me, but if anyone can put my face on Pia Zadoras body, well, fark that.  Especially if Pia is committing a robbery at the time.


Well that's the farking point of what I posted.

Science Fiction serves as a warning as much as it does a dream, an aspiration, or a prediction.

We've had 3 decades to figure this out.
 
2020-06-29 8:19:40 PM  

FrancoFile: almejita: FrancoFile: almejita: So, are we going to have to start discounting video and photographic evidence? Seriously.

Michael Crichton wrote about this nearly 30 years ago.

Ya, but it's happening now.  Losing the ability to produce photographic evidence seems huge to me, but if anyone can put my face on Pia Zadoras body, well, fark that.  Especially if Pia is committing a robbery at the time.

Well that's the farking point of what I posted.

Science Fiction serves as a warning as much as it does a dream, an aspiration, or a prediction.

We've had 3 decades to figure this out.


How does that answer my question of whether we believe photographic or video evidence?
 
2020-06-29 8:26:20 PM  

almejita: FrancoFile: almejita: FrancoFile: almejita: So, are we going to have to start discounting video and photographic evidence? Seriously.

Michael Crichton wrote about this nearly 30 years ago.

Ya, but it's happening now.  Losing the ability to produce photographic evidence seems huge to me, but if anyone can put my face on Pia Zadoras body, well, fark that.  Especially if Pia is committing a robbery at the time.

Well that's the farking point of what I posted.

Science Fiction serves as a warning as much as it does a dream, an aspiration, or a prediction.

We've had 3 decades to figure this out.

How does that answer my question of whether we believe photographic or video evidence?



Go read the book.  Rising Sun, 1992.  Do not watch the crappy movie adaptation.

You can get the ebook and read it before this thread closes, then report back.
 
2020-06-29 8:28:15 PM  

FrancoFile: WoolyManwich: Video fails without the Ah-nold voice. Someone desperately needs to bad-lip-read over this.

You haff my swo-ord.
Und you haff my bow.
Und my achxe.


Two Ah-nold's and one Sean Connery?
 
2020-06-29 8:35:54 PM  

FrancoFile: almejita: FrancoFile: almejita: FrancoFile: almejita: So, are we going to have to start discounting video and photographic evidence? Seriously.

Michael Crichton wrote about this nearly 30 years ago.

Ya, but it's happening now.  Losing the ability to produce photographic evidence seems huge to me, but if anyone can put my face on Pia Zadoras body, well, fark that.  Especially if Pia is committing a robbery at the time.

Well that's the farking point of what I posted.

Science Fiction serves as a warning as much as it does a dream, an aspiration, or a prediction.

We've had 3 decades to figure this out.

How does that answer my question of whether we believe photographic or video evidence?


Go read the book.  Rising Sun, 1992.  Do not watch the crappy movie adaptation.

You can get the ebook and read it before this thread closes, then report back.


Dude I'm asking a serious question, do we believe video and photographic evidence or not.
Does this Deep Fake tech make photo evidence untrustworthy?  I don't need to go read something to ask this question.
 
2020-06-29 8:39:27 PM  

almejita: FrancoFile: almejita: FrancoFile: almejita: FrancoFile: almejita: So, are we going to have to start discounting video and photographic evidence? Seriously.

Michael Crichton wrote about this nearly 30 years ago.

Ya, but it's happening now.  Losing the ability to produce photographic evidence seems huge to me, but if anyone can put my face on Pia Zadoras body, well, fark that.  Especially if Pia is committing a robbery at the time.

Well that's the farking point of what I posted.

Science Fiction serves as a warning as much as it does a dream, an aspiration, or a prediction.

We've had 3 decades to figure this out.

How does that answer my question of whether we believe photographic or video evidence?


Go read the book.  Rising Sun, 1992.  Do not watch the crappy movie adaptation.

You can get the ebook and read it before this thread closes, then report back.

Dude I'm asking a serious question, do we believe video and photographic evidence or not.
Does this Deep Fake tech make photo evidence untrustworthy?  I don't need to go read something to ask this question.


Depends on who "we" are. There are many idiots out there that don't believe the photographic and video evidence of us going to the moon.
 
2020-06-29 8:44:29 PM  

It's Bensane Garrison!: almejita: FrancoFile: almejita: FrancoFile: almejita: FrancoFile: almejita: So, are we going to have to start discounting video and photographic evidence? Seriously.

Michael Crichton wrote about this nearly 30 years ago.

Ya, but it's happening now.  Losing the ability to produce photographic evidence seems huge to me, but if anyone can put my face on Pia Zadoras body, well, fark that.  Especially if Pia is committing a robbery at the time.

Well that's the farking point of what I posted.

Science Fiction serves as a warning as much as it does a dream, an aspiration, or a prediction.

We've had 3 decades to figure this out.

How does that answer my question of whether we believe photographic or video evidence?


Go read the book.  Rising Sun, 1992.  Do not watch the crappy movie adaptation.

You can get the ebook and read it before this thread closes, then report back.

Dude I'm asking a serious question, do we believe video and photographic evidence or not.
Does this Deep Fake tech make photo evidence untrustworthy?  I don't need to go read something to ask this question.

Depends on who "we" are. There are many idiots out there that don't believe the photographic and video evidence of us going to the moon.


Ya, but that's what I am trying to figure out.  If I, who considers himself fairly tech savvy and not a drooling idiot (most of the time) can't tell the difference, how the fark is a jury going to tell the difference between fake video and real video?  Are there markers on the video file or some shiat, cuz if there's no way to tell, well, that will really fark some shiat up.
 
2020-06-29 8:46:04 PM  
Well, that was dumb and pointless.
 
2020-06-29 8:51:21 PM  

almejita: FrancoFile: almejita: FrancoFile: almejita: FrancoFile: almejita: So, are we going to have to start discounting video and photographic evidence? Seriously.

Michael Crichton wrote about this nearly 30 years ago.

Ya, but it's happening now.  Losing the ability to produce photographic evidence seems huge to me, but if anyone can put my face on Pia Zadoras body, well, fark that.  Especially if Pia is committing a robbery at the time.

Well that's the farking point of what I posted.

Science Fiction serves as a warning as much as it does a dream, an aspiration, or a prediction.

We've had 3 decades to figure this out.

How does that answer my question of whether we believe photographic or video evidence?


Go read the book.  Rising Sun, 1992.  Do not watch the crappy movie adaptation.

You can get the ebook and read it before this thread closes, then report back.

Dude I'm asking a serious question, do we believe video and photographic evidence or not.
Does this Deep Fake tech make photo evidence untrustworthy?  I don't need to go read something to ask this question.


Dude, I'm trying to answer your question in a serious way.

Somebody wrote a book that explores the implications of digital recording technologies, closed source code/closed data formats, etc.  It includes an evaluation of how law enforcement and PR people would deal with it.

Rather than me trying to explain all the ramifications of that in a Fark post, I'm recommending that you go read that book in order to educate yourself, and in order to start a philosophical exploration on your part about what evidence and experience actually mean, given the technologies that we have today.
 
2020-06-29 8:55:56 PM  

It's Bensane Garrison!: almejita: FrancoFile: almejita: FrancoFile: almejita: FrancoFile: almejita: So, are we going to have to start discounting video and photographic evidence? Seriously.

Michael Crichton wrote about this nearly 30 years ago.

Ya, but it's happening now.  Losing the ability to produce photographic evidence seems huge to me, but if anyone can put my face on Pia Zadoras body, well, fark that.  Especially if Pia is committing a robbery at the time.

Well that's the farking point of what I posted.

Science Fiction serves as a warning as much as it does a dream, an aspiration, or a prediction.

We've had 3 decades to figure this out.

How does that answer my question of whether we believe photographic or video evidence?


Go read the book.  Rising Sun, 1992.  Do not watch the crappy movie adaptation.

You can get the ebook and read it before this thread closes, then report back.

Dude I'm asking a serious question, do we believe video and photographic evidence or not.
Does this Deep Fake tech make photo evidence untrustworthy?  I don't need to go read something to ask this question.

Depends on who "we" are. There are many idiots out there that don't believe the photographic and video evidence of us going to the moon.


I had a buddy who IT'd for a fairly prominent 'flat earther'.  Said dude actually believed the bullshiat, same buddy also did some install work for dude who outed himself as a killer on some home decor show, Robert something I think, can't rem dude's name.
 
2020-06-29 9:01:06 PM  

almejita: It's Bensane Garrison!: almejita: FrancoFile: almejita: FrancoFile: almejita: FrancoFile: almejita: So, are we going to have to start discounting video and photographic evidence? Seriously.

Michael Crichton wrote about this nearly 30 years ago.

Ya, but it's happening now.  Losing the ability to produce photographic evidence seems huge to me, but if anyone can put my face on Pia Zadoras body, well, fark that.  Especially if Pia is committing a robbery at the time.

Well that's the farking point of what I posted.

Science Fiction serves as a warning as much as it does a dream, an aspiration, or a prediction.

We've had 3 decades to figure this out.

How does that answer my question of whether we believe photographic or video evidence?


Go read the book.  Rising Sun, 1992.  Do not watch the crappy movie adaptation.

You can get the ebook and read it before this thread closes, then report back.

Dude I'm asking a serious question, do we believe video and photographic evidence or not.
Does this Deep Fake tech make photo evidence untrustworthy?  I don't need to go read something to ask this question.

Depends on who "we" are. There are many idiots out there that don't believe the photographic and video evidence of us going to the moon.

Ya, but that's what I am trying to figure out.  If I, who considers himself fairly tech savvy and not a drooling idiot (most of the time) can't tell the difference, how the fark is a jury going to tell the difference between fake video and real video?  Are there markers on the video file or some shiat, cuz if there's no way to tell, well, that will really fark some shiat up.


Yes we're pretty much at the point where any digital images are suspect.

Best Of Deep Fakes Compilation
Youtube xkqflKC64IM
 
2020-06-29 9:01:13 PM  

FrancoFile: almejita: FrancoFile: almejita: FrancoFile: almejita: FrancoFile: almejita: So, are we going to have to start discounting video and photographic evidence? Seriously.

Michael Crichton wrote about this nearly 30 years ago.

Ya, but it's happening now.  Losing the ability to produce photographic evidence seems huge to me, but if anyone can put my face on Pia Zadoras body, well, fark that.  Especially if Pia is committing a robbery at the time.

Well that's the farking point of what I posted.

Science Fiction serves as a warning as much as it does a dream, an aspiration, or a prediction.

We've had 3 decades to figure this out.

How does that answer my question of whether we believe photographic or video evidence?


Go read the book.  Rising Sun, 1992.  Do not watch the crappy movie adaptation.

You can get the ebook and read it before this thread closes, then report back.

Dude I'm asking a serious question, do we believe video and photographic evidence or not.
Does this Deep Fake tech make photo evidence untrustworthy?  I don't need to go read something to ask this question.

Dude, I'm trying to answer your question in a serious way.

Somebody wrote a book that explores the implications of digital recording technologies, closed source code/closed data formats, etc.  It includes an evaluation of how law enforcement and PR people would deal with it.

Rather than me trying to explain all the ramifications of that in a Fark post, I'm recommending that you go read that book in order to educate yourself, and in order to start a philosophical exploration on your part about what evidence and experience actually mean, given the technologies that we have today.


Man I realize what you are trying to do, but I don't need to go read something I have already read.  I am asking a question that can't be answered by fiction from 1994.  The tech we have now is real, and happening, I'm looking for real answers, not 'go read this and this will give you my point of view.'  I want to know what's up, and for some reason I trust Fark to give me a heads up when i ask a question.
 
2020-06-29 9:07:53 PM  

almejita: FrancoFile: almejita: FrancoFile: almejita: FrancoFile: almejita: FrancoFile: almejita: So, are we going to have to start discounting video and photographic evidence? Seriously.

Michael Crichton wrote about this nearly 30 years ago.

Ya, but it's happening now.  Losing the ability to produce photographic evidence seems huge to me, but if anyone can put my face on Pia Zadoras body, well, fark that.  Especially if Pia is committing a robbery at the time.

Well that's the farking point of what I posted.

Science Fiction serves as a warning as much as it does a dream, an aspiration, or a prediction.

We've had 3 decades to figure this out.

How does that answer my question of whether we believe photographic or video evidence?


Go read the book.  Rising Sun, 1992.  Do not watch the crappy movie adaptation.

You can get the ebook and read it before this thread closes, then report back.

Dude I'm asking a serious question, do we believe video and photographic evidence or not.
Does this Deep Fake tech make photo evidence untrustworthy?  I don't need to go read something to ask this question.

Dude, I'm trying to answer your question in a serious way.

Somebody wrote a book that explores the implications of digital recording technologies, closed source code/closed data formats, etc.  It includes an evaluation of how law enforcement and PR people would deal with it.

Rather than me trying to explain all the ramifications of that in a Fark post, I'm recommending that you go read that book in order to educate yourself, and in order to start a philosophical exploration on your part about what evidence and experience actually mean, given the technologies that we have today.

Man I realize what you are trying to do, but I don't need to go read something I have already read.  I am asking a question that can't be answered by fiction from 1994.  The tech we have now is real, and happening, I'm looking for real answers, not 'go read this and this will give you my point of view.'  I ...



Sigh.  I give up.  I don't have 20 hours to do a Socratic dialog with you.  And I'm not going to be as good an interlocutor as Crichton will be, even though he's been dead for 10 years.

I've told you how I figured out how to regard recorded imagery, but apparently you're too busy or important to do that, and expect me to spit out a one-paragraph answer that will put your existential dread to bed.
 
2020-06-29 9:13:22 PM  

FunkJunkie: almejita: It's Bensane Garrison!: almejita: FrancoFile: almejita: FrancoFile: almejita: FrancoFile: almejita: So, are we going to have to start discounting video and photographic evidence? Seriously.

Michael Crichton wrote about this nearly 30 years ago.

Ya, but it's happening now.  Losing the ability to produce photographic evidence seems huge to me, but if anyone can put my face on Pia Zadoras body, well, fark that.  Especially if Pia is committing a robbery at the time.

Well that's the farking point of what I posted.

Science Fiction serves as a warning as much as it does a dream, an aspiration, or a prediction.

We've had 3 decades to figure this out.

How does that answer my question of whether we believe photographic or video evidence?


Go read the book.  Rising Sun, 1992.  Do not watch the crappy movie adaptation.

You can get the ebook and read it before this thread closes, then report back.

Dude I'm asking a serious question, do we believe video and photographic evidence or not.
Does this Deep Fake tech make photo evidence untrustworthy?  I don't need to go read something to ask this question.

Depends on who "we" are. There are many idiots out there that don't believe the photographic and video evidence of us going to the moon.

Ya, but that's what I am trying to figure out.  If I, who considers himself fairly tech savvy and not a drooling idiot (most of the time) can't tell the difference, how the fark is a jury going to tell the difference between fake video and real video?  Are there markers on the video file or some shiat, cuz if there's no way to tell, well, that will really fark some shiat up.

Yes we're pretty much at the point where any digital images are suspect.

[Youtube-video https://www.youtube.com/embed/xkqflKC6​4IM]


Think that's going to transfer to, I guess, the courts and juries?  I guess it will have to, damn, seems like if you have a criminal enterprise, this is the first break in a long time.
 
2020-06-29 9:21:20 PM  

almejita: FrancoFile: almejita: FrancoFile: almejita: FrancoFile: almejita: So, are we going to have to start discounting video and photographic evidence? Seriously.

Michael Crichton wrote about this nearly 30 years ago.

Ya, but it's happening now.  Losing the ability to produce photographic evidence seems huge to me, but if anyone can put my face on Pia Zadoras body, well, fark that.  Especially if Pia is committing a robbery at the time.

Well that's the farking point of what I posted.

Science Fiction serves as a warning as much as it does a dream, an aspiration, or a prediction.

We've had 3 decades to figure this out.

How does that answer my question of whether we believe photographic or video evidence?


Go read the book.  Rising Sun, 1992.  Do not watch the crappy movie adaptation.

You can get the ebook and read it before this thread closes, then report back.

Dude I'm asking a serious question, do we believe video and photographic evidence or not.
Does this Deep Fake tech make photo evidence untrustworthy?  I don't need to go read something to ask this question.


You believe it when it isn't full of blurry shiatty artifacts like all deepfakes are.
 
2020-06-29 9:22:53 PM  

almejita: FunkJunkie: almejita: It's Bensane Garrison!: almejita: FrancoFile: almejita: FrancoFile: almejita: FrancoFile: almejita: So, are we going to have to start discounting video and photographic evidence? Seriously.

Michael Crichton wrote about this nearly 30 years ago.

Ya, but it's happening now.  Losing the ability to produce photographic evidence seems huge to me, but if anyone can put my face on Pia Zadoras body, well, fark that.  Especially if Pia is committing a robbery at the time.

Well that's the farking point of what I posted.

Science Fiction serves as a warning as much as it does a dream, an aspiration, or a prediction.

We've had 3 decades to figure this out.

How does that answer my question of whether we believe photographic or video evidence?


Go read the book.  Rising Sun, 1992.  Do not watch the crappy movie adaptation.

You can get the ebook and read it before this thread closes, then report back.

Dude I'm asking a serious question, do we believe video and photographic evidence or not.
Does this Deep Fake tech make photo evidence untrustworthy?  I don't need to go read something to ask this question.

Depends on who "we" are. There are many idiots out there that don't believe the photographic and video evidence of us going to the moon.

Ya, but that's what I am trying to figure out.  If I, who considers himself fairly tech savvy and not a drooling idiot (most of the time) can't tell the difference, how the fark is a jury going to tell the difference between fake video and real video?  Are there markers on the video file or some shiat, cuz if there's no way to tell, well, that will really fark some shiat up.

Yes we're pretty much at the point where any digital images are suspect.

[Youtube-video https://www.youtube.com/embed/xkqflKC6​4IM]

Think that's going to transfer to, I guess, the courts and juries?  I guess it will have to, damn, seems like if you have a criminal enterprise, this is the first break in a long time.


As I understand it the really good ones require a large amount of images of the superimposed face to be fed to the programs to really work well which is why most of them are of movie stars. The technology will continue to improve though. Where it takes us I have no clue. Definitely something to be aware of.
 
2020-06-29 10:01:16 PM  
That was so uncanny valley.

It doesn't help that the scene was terrible to begin with.
 
2020-06-29 10:38:23 PM  
Elrond and Boromir seemed to be the most refined.  The rest were ok.

Still pretty disturbing at the same time as being interesting.
 
2020-06-29 10:43:05 PM  
Then they got to the choppa, flew to the volcano, destroyed the ring, and were at the Prancing Pony by happy hour that same day. The end.
 
2020-06-29 10:54:27 PM  

almejita: Does this Deep Fake tech make photo evidence untrustworthy?


Assuming we get to a technological place where it's indistinguishable from the genuine article, It will completely depend on context and the people involved.

If it's low income people arguing over a dispute in small claims court, no one will care.  The judge will rule for whoever they like better regardless of good or bad evidence, just like always.

If it's something that affects large numbers of people and/or shapes an ideological or geopolitical narrative, then you might have some snowballing problems.

I personally think the encroaching danger has been a bit overstated.  If anything, it will just plunge the social media signal-to-noise ratio into murkier depths than it already is.
 
2020-06-30 9:21:14 AM  
This was addressed in the Schwarzenegger documentary Running Man.  It ends with a dad joke and murder.

/he was framed
 
2020-06-30 6:05:10 PM  

FunkJunkie: almejita: It's Bensane Garrison!: almejita: FrancoFile: almejita: FrancoFile: almejita: FrancoFile: almejita: So, are we going to have to start discounting video and photographic evidence? Seriously.

Michael Crichton wrote about this nearly 30 years ago.

Ya, but it's happening now.  Losing the ability to produce photographic evidence seems huge to me, but if anyone can put my face on Pia Zadoras body, well, fark that.  Especially if Pia is committing a robbery at the time.

Well that's the farking point of what I posted.

Science Fiction serves as a warning as much as it does a dream, an aspiration, or a prediction.

We've had 3 decades to figure this out.

How does that answer my question of whether we believe photographic or video evidence?


Go read the book.  Rising Sun, 1992.  Do not watch the crappy movie adaptation.

You can get the ebook and read it before this thread closes, then report back.

Dude I'm asking a serious question, do we believe video and photographic evidence or not.
Does this Deep Fake tech make photo evidence untrustworthy?  I don't need to go read something to ask this question.

Depends on who "we" are. There are many idiots out there that don't believe the photographic and video evidence of us going to the moon.

Ya, but that's what I am trying to figure out.  If I, who considers himself fairly tech savvy and not a drooling idiot (most of the time) can't tell the difference, how the fark is a jury going to tell the difference between fake video and real video?  Are there markers on the video file or some shiat, cuz if there's no way to tell, well, that will really fark some shiat up.

Yes we're pretty much at the point where any digital images are suspect.

[iFrame https://www.youtube.com/embed/xkqflKC6​4IM?autoplay=1&widget_referrer=https%3​A%2F%2Fwww.fark.com&start=0&enablejsap​i=1&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.fark.com&​widgetid=1]


Ferguson. Turd. Ferguson.
 
Displayed 36 of 36 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter




In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.