Computing > Security

New York Times wants to use Blockchain to stamp out fake news

<< < (2/2)

Bud:
Sorry but it seems you still do not get my point... What i was saying was putting a fake photo in a block chain does not make the photo not fake one. This process only will only protect the fake photo from being changed further and create an illusion of truth, false sense of authenticity of the content in that photo. NY Times is basically saying "Do not question what we say, trust us, we never lie". Really?

tggzzz:
Old crypto proverb...

If you think cryptography will solve your problem, you don't understand cryptography and you don't understand your problem.

The Soulman:

--- Quote from: Bud on July 26, 2019, 03:23:06 am ---Yes i have checked the link. What you are saying is you ultimately trust the origin of artefacts placed in the blockchain, in this case NY Times. My comment was about challenging that ultimate trust. The artefacts may not be genuine in the first place.

--- End quote ---

Correct, but the blockchain does help the different channels to be more consistent with their (fake) news, so they
all report the same so it must be trustworthy, surely, has to be??

I've stopped watching the news years ago.



windsmurf:

--- Quote from: Bud on August 15, 2019, 02:14:00 am ---Sorry but it seems you still do not get my point... What i was saying was putting a fake photo in a block chain does not make the photo not fake one. This process only will only protect the fake photo from being changed further and create an illusion of truth, false sense of authenticity of the content in that photo. NY Times is basically saying "Do not question what we say, trust us, we never lie". Really?

--- End quote ---

Yeah stamping out "fake news" is misleading.  All this will do is to validate sources of pictures, and for now, allow manual fact checking against the source. 
I foresee this enabling the development of an automated fact-checking system.    Of course, the question will still remain if the source of the facts are credible, but at least you will know if it checks out against media sources you've decided you trust more than others. 

magic:
How about good old "just go to the purported source website and watch it there"? I always assume that copies and screenshots are spoofs unless proven otherwise.

Like seriously, people who care to validate whether what they watch is genuine can and already do it with ease. Your problem is different :P

And it probably cuts both ways: it will make it possible to prove that a copy of some embarassing garbage really comes from NYT or whoever else, making it impossible for them to ninja-edit mistakes and pretend nothing happened. I can see the crowds of journalists waiting eagerly for such technology :)

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page

There was an error while thanking
Thanking...
Go to full version