Tag Archive for Politics

Deepfakes Threaten Democracy: Trump Most Faked

Deepfakes Threaten Democracy: Trump Most FakedWith the 2024 U.S. presidential election looming, a new report from Kapwing examines deepfakes of public figures. Deepfakes are artificial intelligence (AI) that uses machine learning to create or manipulate videos or audio to make it look or sound like someone is saying or doing something they never actually did. What they found is alarming for Democracy. Their research found that Donald Trump and his fellow traveler Elon Musk are the most frequently deepfaked politicians. The Kapwing study tracked deepfake video requests using text-to-video AI tools. It found that 64% of the deepfaked videos were of politicians and business leaders.

The most deepfakes

The most deepfakesThe Kapwing video content platform analyzed deepfaked politicians. The platform’s top deepfaked politician is Donald Trump. The Republican candidate topped the list with 12,384 deepfake videos. Trump was followed closely by Elon Musk, the CEO of Tesla and X (formerly Twitter), with over 9,500 deepfakes. Current US President Joe Biden ranked third with 7,596 deepfakes.

The prominence of Trump as a deepfake target underscores the growing risk this technology poses to Democracy. Attackers can weaponize deepfake politicians to spread misinformation, influence, or deceive voters. Eric Lu, the co-founder of Kapwing, says weaponization is already occurring, “The findings of our study clearly show that video deepfakes have already gone mainstream…”

Social media’s role

Social mediaSocial media platforms are often the primary channels for deepfakes, boosting their popularity. Kapwing’s study urges platforms to take responsibility for disseminating deepfaked media. Lu, who conducted the study, blames the social media companies, saying, “Social media platforms like YouTube, Instagram, Facebook, and X have an important responsibility to prevent fake news or financial scams early on before the posts go viral.” 

When deepfakes attack

When deepfakes attackDeepfake attacks have already occurred. These are some prominent examples. First, in September 2024, during a Zoom call, Senator Ben Cardin, chair of the United States Foreign Relations Committee, was the victim of a sophisticated deepfake impersonation. The impersonator posed as Dmytro Kuleba, Ukraine’s former Foreign Affairs Minister, and attempted to elicit politically charged responses regarding the upcoming U.S. Presidential election.

Then, in January 2024, voters in New Hampshire received a deepfake robocall purporting to be from President Joe Biden. The New Hampshire attorney general’s office released a statement debunking the hoax. The Feds later traced the calls to a political consultant.

Another incident took place in November 2023. A deepfake audio of London Mayor Sadiq Khan’s voice making remarks critical of Armistice Day, which marks the end of World War One, was leaked. Finally, a video emerged in April 2018 of former U.S. President Barack Obama where the so-called ‘Obama’ utters uncharacteristic profanities.

The deepfakes regulatory challenge

Efforts to regulate deepfakes are already facing hurdlesEfforts to regulate deepfakes face hurdles. For instance, in October 2024, a federal judge blocked AB 2839, a California law allowing individuals to sue over election-related deepfakes on the grounds of First Amendment concerns.

Another attempt at regulating deepfakes came in April 2024. The Federal Communications Commission outlawed robocalls that contained voices generated by artificial intelligence. This decision conveys that exploiting technology to scam people and mislead voters will not be tolerated.

This legal challenge highlights the difficulty of crafting effective regulations that address the threats posed by deepfake technology without infringing on free speech.

However, due to the increased sophistication of Generative AI, tech platforms and regulators must balance innovation and security.

How to stop deepfakes

Stop deepfakesLu proposes several steps to combat deepfakes. First, he calls for watermarked AI-generated content. This would involve integrating built-in encrypted timestamps on all recording devices to create a watermark at the moment of capture. The encrypted watermarks can be based on the highly secure Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) to distinguish authentic content from deepfakes. Next, the CEO suggests that social media platforms add clear labels on deepfake videos. He also laments that a comprehensive solution remains elusive.

To spot deepfakes, Lu says: “My top three tips are looking for a blurry mouth area or inconsistent movement of the teeth, watching out for unnatural blinking or lack of blinking, and listening for monotone voices and unnatural breathing patterns.

rb-

The biggest problem with deepfakes is the software. The perverse thing is that candidates can now deceive voters by claiming that actual events are AI-manufactured deep fakes and discredit facts.

The Kapwing report paints a concerning picture of deepfakes targeting politicians, particularly Donald Trump. These manipulated videos and audio significantly risk Democracy by spreading misinformation and swaying voters. While legal regulations to curb deepfakes face free speech challenges, there’s still hope.

The fight against deepfakes requires a multi-pronged approach. It’s a race against continuously evolving AI, but by combining technological solutions, responsible social media practices, and public awareness, we can safeguard Democracy from the manipulative power of deepfakes. After all, a well-informed public is the first line of defense against misinformation.

 

Related article

 

Ralph Bach has been in IT for a while and has blogged from the Bach Seat about IT, careers, and anything else that has caught my attention since 2005. You can follow me on Facebook or Mastodon. Email the Bach Seat here.

The Hidden Agenda Behind Opposition to Great Lakes Wind Power

The Hidden Agenda Behind Opposition to Great Lakes Wind Power-Updated 01/24/2023 – The Detroit Free Press reports that a group called Citizens for Local Choice is attacking Michigan’s wind power projects. The Bridge says the group is an offshoot of Our Home, Our Voice. Leadership includes Kevon Martis, a Lenawee County commissioner and fellow with the Energy & Environment Legal Institute, a conservative think tank that opposes renewable energy. The group was incorporated in Michigan in Feb. 2023. 

Offshore wind power development in the Great Lakes region has potential. With its 3,288 miles of shorelines along four of the five Great Lakes, Michigan could emerge as a leader in the green energy market. The consistent winds across the Great Lakes offer the opportunity to power offshore wind turbines. They could generate over 570 Gigawatts of green energy. Michigan could become a net exporter of green energy to the rest of the country. Estimates from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) suggest that offshore power could generate over 18 times Michigan’s annual needs. Despite the abundant natural resources and potential economic benefits, no commercial wind turbines have been installed. Why is that?

Policymakers are Afraid of Wind Power

Doug Bessette is a professor of community sustainability at Michigan State University. He studies the acceptance of renewables. The Professor told Public News Service Michigan is no closer to ramping up the technology than it was 10 years ago. Mr. Bassest continued,

“I think a lot of policymakers are hesitant to get offshore wind attached to their name because it’s such a controversial technology. I think people are afraid to push it forward.”

Why is off-shore wind power controversial? The Climate and Development Lab (CDL) at Brown University may have one answer: Greed. In Against the Wind: A Map of the Anti-Offshore Wind Network in the Eastern United States, the CDL studied the opposition to offshore wind power and found some familiar names.

Dark Money

Shedding light on dark money: how governments can tackle illicit financeDark money is a term that refers to political spending by groups that do not disclose their donors. This makes it difficult to trace the source and influence of their money. Dark money affects democracy in several ways.

  • The Center for Public Integrity says dark money undermines the political system’s accountability and transparency. Voters do not know who is trying to influence them or what their motives are.
  • The Brennan Center for Justice maintains dark money creates an imbalance of power and representation. Wealthy and powerful interests can spend unlimited amounts of money to sway elections and policies in their favor, often at the expense of the public interest.

Dark money undermines the accountability and transparency of the democratic process since voters do not know who is trying to influence them or their motives. The people feel that their voices and votes do not matter or that the system is rigged against them. Many agree that dark money poses a serious threat to the health and integrity of democracy.

The War Over Wind Power

According to the CDL study, the war against offshore power began 12 years ago.

Astroturfing and COVID-19The plan includes a “national professional PR campaign” to cause “subversion in message of [wind] industry so that it effectively becomes so bad no one wants to admit in public
they are for it (much like wind has done to coal, by turning green to black and clean to dirty).” This campaign “must appear as a ‘groundswell’ among grass roots.” The tactics delineated in this memo include trainings for local anti-OSW groups, coordinated messaging and advertisements, and collaborations with other interest groups such as traditional environmentalists, the Tea Party, and property rights organizations.

Dark Money Networks

The report includes familiar names. The CDL “identified six major fossil fuel and dark money donors—the Charles Koch Foundation, the Charles Koch Institute, DonorsTrust, the State Policy Network State Policy Network, a key national player in right-wing politics and the climate change counter-movement, and the American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers Association—that fund 17 think tanks involved in the anti-OSW network.”

How dark money works

The CDL states that these groups all have intimate ties to the fossil fuel industry. They point out that the Charles Koch Foundation, Charles Koch Institute, and DonorsTrust are key charitable wings of the sprawling Koch network of donors. Their activities encompass think tanks and astroturf groups that advance right-wing causes, especially obstruction to climate policy. 

The Oil and Gas Industry Is Behind Offshore Wind MisinformationThe report identified another group fighting wind power – the Koch-related State Policy Network (SPN). According to the Center for Media and Democracy (CMD), the SPN has affiliates in all 50 states. SPN plays an integral role in ensuring legislation gets passed in state houses. SPN members attract media attention, provide academic legitimacy when called on to testify at hearings, and produce “studies” or model legislation. That legislation often comes in the form of model bills drafted by corporate lobbyists and lawmakers at SPN’s sister organization, the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC). In Michigan, that includes the Mackinac Center.

Windpower Opposition in Michigan

According to the CMD, in 2021, the Mackinac Center posted revenues of $15.6 million. It is one of the largest right-wing state policy groups in the country. The CDL says the Mackinac Center, based in Midland, MI, received part of the $870,000 that SPN spent to fight off-shore wind power. The Mackinac Center has a long history of opposition to green energy, like wind power in Michigan, dating back to at least 2012. Others also report on the long-standing Koch dark money support of the Mackinac Center.

RB-

The problem is that neither citizens nor politicians want to understand the risks of climate change. There are several reasons for this disbelief.

Many argue that even if climate change science is real, it doesn’t matter. God is going to use climate change to enact his wrath on the world. And you can’t fight God.

Another factor is the quality of the politicians creating policy. Many politicians these days focus on legislating civil and criminal laws that reflect their view of religion in political life. As we have seen, these beliefs can also lead to violence and insurrection.

Efforts to counter climate change involve significant change and sacrifice in the short run.

For these reasons, wind power on the Great Lakes remains dormant, and climate change continues progressing.

Related article

 

Ralph Bach has been in IT long enough to know better and has blogged from his Bach Seat about IT, careers, and anything else that catches his attention since 2005. You can follow him on LinkedInFacebook, and Twitter. Email the Bach Seat here.

KOSA: A Bad Idea for Online Safety

KOSA: A Bad Idea for Online SafetyThe Kids Online Safety Act, known as KOSA, is another half-assed publicity grab. The politicians fail to address the root cause of the problem – data collection. We can all agree that social media is bad for kids. There is enough proof from multiple studies and former social media company employees. Therefore, KOSA is not the answer. It will infringe on the rights and interests of all internet users.

Kids Online Safety Act

Two-tier Internet in the U.S.To begin with, the Kids Online Safety Act, known as KOSA introduced by Senators Richard Blumenthal (D) and Marsha Blackburn (R), would establish a two-tier Internet in the U.S. The bill requires that sites that are ‘likely to be accessed by kids‘ act in the “best interest of users who are 16 or younger.” That means that all platforms would be responsible for mitigating the risk of physical or emotional harm to young users. This includes “the promotion of self-harm or suicide, encouragement of addictive behavior, enabling of online bullying or predatory marketing.” Sound nice; however, KOSA is not the solution we need. Here are some of the reasons to oppose KOSA:

Kids Online Safety Act safety

The KOSA requirements would mandate that platforms have parental controls. These government-mandated controls could be harmful to kids in abusive situations. According to Fight for the Future, a coalition of over 50 civil society groups, “KOSA risks subjecting teens who are experiencing domestic violence and parental abuse to additional forms of digital surveillance and control that could prevent these vulnerable youth from reaching out for help or support.

Additionally, the KOSA requirements would endanger VPNs (one of the government’s favorite boogey-techs). The group wrote; “… by creating strong incentives to filter and enable parental control over the content minors can access, KOSA could also jeopardize young people’s access to end-to-end encrypted technologies, which they depend on to access resources related to mental health and to keep their data safe from bad actors.”

KOSA is government censorship

seeking to make political pointsKOSA would give the President control over what people see online. The government would create a “Kids Online Safety Council” that would advise the government on implementing and enforcing KOSA. As a result, the legislation’s requirement to restrict access to topics such as sex education, LGBTQ issues, and mental health from minors could cause platforms KOSA could force platforms to self-censor just to avoid the hassle and costs.

Furthermore, Fight for the Future writes that censorship would be politically driven. “Online services would face substantial pressure to over-moderate, including from state Attorneys General seeking to make political points… KOSA would cut off another vital avenue of access to information for vulnerable youth.”

KOSA encourages more data collection

incentivize sites to collect even more informationAccording to Fight for the Future, the bill would incentivize sites to collect even more information about children to verify their ages and place further restrictions on minors’ accounts. They explain,

“Age verification may require users to provide platforms with personally identifiable information such as date of birth and government-issued identification documents, which can threaten users’ privacy, including through the risk of data breaches, and chill their willingness to access sensitive information online because they cannot do so anonymously.”

Therefore, they conclude, “Rather than age-gating privacy settings and safety tools to apply only to minors, Congress should focus on ensuring that all users, regardless of age, benefit from strong privacy protections by passing comprehensive privacy legislation.”

Kids Online Safety Act unintended consequences

unintended consequencesKOSA would also create unintended consequences. The unintended consequences include driving children to use less secure or more harmful platforms. The Kids Online Safety Act would make kids more vulnerable to online predators who could exploit their age verification information. It would also undermine the trust and communication between children and parents, as well as between platforms and users.

rb-

There are valid concerns about the impact of social media on us all. But the Kids Online Safety Act misses the point. Congress should be targeting data collection. Nearly all social media platforms and online businesses collect personal data from their users. The EFF points out that all social media firms harvest and monetize our personal data and incentivize other online businesses to do the same. The result is that detailed information about us is widely available to purchasers, thieves, and government subpoenas.

Consider location data brokers, for example. Our apps collect detailed records of our online activities without our knowledge or genuine consent. The app developers sell it to data brokers, who will in turn sell it to anyone who will pay for it. An election denier bought it to try to prove voting fraud. One broker sold data on who had visited reproductive health facilities.

If a bad actor or the government wanted to buy this data, it could probably find a way to do so. Collecting more data will not stop the bad actors from acquiring PII.

The better approach is to limit how all businesses collect personal data. This would de-incentive data collection and reduce the supply of data for bad actors.

Everybody should be allowed to make informed choices based on their own values and preferences.

 

How you can help Ukraine!

Related article

 

Ralph Bach has been in IT long enough to know better and has blogged from his Bach Seat about IT, careers, and anything else that catches his attention since 2005. You can follow him on LinkedInFacebook, and Twitter. Email the Bach Seat here.

How the RESTRICT Act Will Ruin Your Online Privacy

How the RESTRICT Act Will Ruin Your Online PrivacyThe RESTRICT Act is better known as the “TikTok ban.” It is a bill where politicians are using national security rhetoric to enact sweeping legislation. The RESTRICT Act was introduced by Senators Mark Warner (D) and John Thune (R) in March 2023. RESTRICT stands for Restricting the Emergence of Security Threats that Risk Information and Communications Technology Act of 2023. The TikTok ban would give the President the ability to criminalize entire communications platforms, they oppose. The act will allow the executive branch to control what apps and technologies Americans have access to without a way to challenge those actions in court.

prohibit transactionsThe bill authorizes the President through the Secretary of Commerce to prohibit transactions involving information and communications technology (ICT) products and services in which any foreign adversary has any interest. The bill requires the Commerce Department to maintain a list of foreign entities that pose a risk to the U.S. ICT supply chain. The bill classifies China (including Hong Kong and Macau), Cuba, Iran, Russia, and Venezuela as foreign adversaries.

The RESTRICT Act

Under the RESTRICT Act, the President could criminalize the entire communications platform he or she opposes. The Commerce Department will have broad powers. The bill authorizes them to, “deter, disrupt, prevent, investigate, and mitigate transactions” involving social media they do not like. It is not unreasonable to anticipate that the next Republican President would use the act. They could shut down any platform that contains information on Reproductive Rights, Black Lives Matter, Supreme Court ethics, Criminal trials, Disney, or the outrage du jour.

The “TikTok ban” is bad for America for a number of reasons. There are technical and Constitutional problems with the bill. The biggest technical threat is banning VPNs. Banning VPNs has long been a goal of the FBI as part of their “going dark” fear-mongering.

VPN’s

A Virtual Private Network (VPN) is a service that encrypts and routes your internet traffic through a server in another location. A VPN encrypts your communications to protect your data. VPNs make it appear as if you are accessing the web from the VPN server’s location. This legislation could outlaw the use of VPNs. The bill would give the Department of Commerce broad power to impose “mitigation measures” on technology products. The bill could criminalize the use of VPNs, or even ban VPNs altogether. The bill’s vague language leaves room for interpretation and uncertainty.

First Amendment

First AmendmentExperts agree the legislation would violate our First Amendment rights of the Constitution without actually protecting American consumers. The TikTok ban is a violation of the First Amendment because it infringes on the right of millions of Americans to express themselves and access information on a popular social media platform. The ban is also overbroad and disproportionate, as it would effectively censor all social media content, regardless of its source or nature. The ban would set a dangerous precedent for government interference with free speech online and would undermine the values of democracy and openness that the First Amendment is meant to protect.

Fourth Amendment

Fourth AmendmentThe TikTok ban is a violation of the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution. The 4th Amendment protects the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures. The RESTRICT Act allows the government to access and delete the personal data of millions of social media users without their consent, probable cause, or a warrant. This would infringe on their privacy and freedom of expression. The ban would also harm the creators and businesses that rely on social media as a source of income and exposure. The ban is not justified by any compelling national security interest, but rather by political motives and unfounded allegations.

RESTRICT Act Punishes Americans

civil and criminal penaltiesAmericans who violate The RESTRICT Act could end up with civil and criminal penalties. The bill would impose civil and criminal penalties for violations of any order or mitigation measure issued. The civil penalties include fines up to $250,000 or twice the value of the transaction that served as the basis of the order, whichever is greater. The criminal penalties of up to $1 million and up to 20 years imprisonment.

rb-

There are legitimate data privacy concerns about all social media platforms, including but not limited to TikTok. The EFF points out that all social media firms harvest and monetize our personal data and incentivize other online businesses to do the same. Nearly all social media platforms and other online businesses collect a lot of personal data from their users. The result is that detailed information about us is widely available to purchasers, thieves, and government subpoenas.

Consider location data brokers, for example. Our phone apps collect detailed records of our physical movements, without our knowledge or genuine consent. The app developers sell it to data brokers, who in turn sell it to anyone who will pay for it. An election denier bought it to try to prove voting fraud. One broker sold data on who had visited reproductive health facilities.

If China wanted to buy this data, it could probably find a way to do so. Banning TikTok from operating in the U.S. probably would not stop China from acquiring the location data of people here. The better approach is to limit how all businesses in the U.S. collect personal data. This would reduce the supply of data that any adversary might obtain.

President Biden has already said he would sign off on the RESTRICT Act if it lands on his desk,

Everybody should be allowed to make informed choices based on their own values and preferences.

 

How you can help Ukraine!

Related article

 

Ralph Bach has been in IT long enough to know better and has blogged from his Bach Seat about IT, careers, and anything else that catches his attention since 2005. You can follow him on LinkedInFacebook, and Twitter. Email the Bach Seat here.

What to do with Your Twitter Account

What to do with Your Twitter AccountThe world’s richest man has control of Twitter (TWTR). Sure, all social media platforms are outlets for doomscrolling, bullying and misinformation. But in the short time Elon Musk has been the “Chief Twit,” some events have take place on the platform that raise concerns about the “hellscape” the new Twitter could become. Some examples include:

Mr. Musk has grand ambitions to morph Twitter into some vaguely defined metaverse hole that could collect more personal info. He tweeted in October, “Buying Twitter is an accelerant to creating X, the everything app.” It is a good time to review your Twitter account. USA Today published a handy guide to getting as much control as possible over your account.

How to secure your Twitter account

You should have already secured you Twitter account. Make sure you are using a unique and complex password. Set up two-factor authentication. Both steps make it harder to get hacked. It’s also a good time to back up your tweets. You should backup the photos, DMs, and other 280 character snippets of life you might want to remember later. It’s easy to do, although time-consuming, to download your Twitter data.

Don’t feed the trolls

There are plenty of people on Twitter who want nothing more than to spew hate and make everyone else’s day miserable. Blocking people might seem like the best way to get those trolls to disappear, but the author says there’s a wrinkle.

When you block someone – they won’t be able to send you tweets or tag you in posts, and you’ll never see them again unless you decide to unblock them in the future. The wrinkle is that they’ll immediately know that you’ve blocked them, and if they’re bent on harassing you, they can easily make a new account and start the cycle over again.

The article suggests that muting a user is sometimes even more effective. By selecting “Mute @User” in the menu on their tweet  you’ll never see their messages again. They won’t know that you’ve muted them. They can keep on being jerks, and you can move on with your day.

Spammers, scammers, and bots, oh my!

Many accounts on Twitter aren’t real. Bot accounts seek out people to harass, advertise to, or scam through sketchy tweets and messages. To combat bots, go to Twitter’s Settings > Notifications > Filters and make sure “Quality Filter” is turned on.

It’s also a good idea to block direct messages from anyone who doesn’t follow you. Do this by heading into Settings > Privacy and Safety > Direct Messages and ensuring that the “Allow message requests from everyone” is turned off. Also, enable “Filter low-quality messages” to protect against spam.

You can also lock down your tweets to make sure only people who follow you see them. To do this, go into your Settings > Privacy and Safety> Audience and Tagging, then select Protect Your Tweets.

Filter your feed

TwitterIf you plan to continue using Twitter as you always have but don’t want to hear about certain topics, it’s easy to filter those topics by blocking words and phrases. Go to Settings > Privacy and Safety > Mute and Block and then click “Muted Words” to begin adding words to your mute list. If someone you follow tweets or retweets a message that includes that word, the entire tweet will be blocked from your timeline.

So, for example, if you’re tired of hearing about Donald Trump add “Donald Trump,” “Donald,” and “Trump” to the list. That will cover all the uses of his name and dramatically cut down the number of tweets you see about the big lie. You can do this with any news story, topic, or event you’re just fed up with.

If you are going to stay on Elon Musk’s $44 Billion dollar play thing, you should periodically clean up your tweets. USA Today recommends Semiphemeral to automatically purge you tweets.

How to delete Twitter on Android

If Mr. Musk’s antics are too much and you are going to quit Twitter, there a several steps to take before you delete the app from your phone. First, make sure you’ve downloaded a copy of your data first. You must request a copy of your files before deactivating your account.

Be sure to revoke any third-party access to Twitter you have granted. Otherwise your account count could magically gets reactivated by a third-arty app.

In order to delete your Twitter account, you have to deactivate it first. To deactivate you Twitter account, login to your account from Twitter App and go to Settings and Privacy.

  1. Click Account.deactivate you Twitter account
  2. Now, click Deactivate your account.deactivate you Twitter account 2
  3. Click Deactivate.deactivate you Twitter account 3
  4. Enter your password to confirm your identity.

Now you can delete the account. To delete your Twitter account:

  1. Tap on the menu icon or profile photo in the upper left-hand corner and select Settings and Privacy from the dropdown.delete your Twitter account
  2. Tap on the Your account tab.delete your Twitter account 2
  3. Scroll down until you find the Deactivate Account tab and tap on it.delete your Twitter account 3
  4. Read the information provided and then scroll down and tap on Deactivate.delete your Twitter account 4
  5. You will have to confirm your password to complete the process.delete your Twitter account 5
  6. The app will once again ask you to confirm that you want to deactivate your account. Twitter will then confirm your decision.

If you don’t access your account for 30 days it will be permanently deleted from Twitter.

Some things to remember

Your Twitter information might still appear on search engines. You have to follow up with them to have that data removed. Also, once your account is deleted, someone else can sign up using your name.

 

How you can help Ukraine!

Related article

 

Ralph Bach has been in IT long enough to know better and has blogged from his Bach Seat about IT, careers, and anything else that catches his attention since 2005. You can follow him on LinkedInFacebook, and Twitter. Email the Bach Seat here.