By now, you have most likely heard of deepfakes and how “AI could send us back 100 years when it comes to how we consume news” (MIT Technology Review) or “we’ll shortly live in a world where our eyes routinely deceive us … we’re not so far from the collapse of reality” (The Atlantic).

到现在为止，您最有可能听说过深造假，以及“ AI如何将我们带回我们消费新闻的100年”(《 麻省理工学院技术评论》 )或“我们将生活在一个我们的眼睛经常欺骗我们的世界中” ……我们离现实的崩溃还很远”( 《大西洋》 )。

You may have seen this video of an Obama deepfake created by Jordan Peele:

您可能已经看过约旦·皮尔(Jordan Peele)制作的奥巴马Deepfake视频：

Or this one of Bill Hader morphing into Tom Cruise and Seth Rogen (if not, I highly recommend it):

或者这比尔·哈德(Bill Hader)变成汤姆·克鲁斯(Tom Cruise)和塞斯·罗根(Seth Rogen)(如果没有，我强烈推荐)：

Deepfakes have been causing quite the controversy. Responses to them have ranged from Congress proposing the Malicious Deep Fake Prohibition Act and the DEEPFAKES Accountability Act, Facebook banning deepfakes, and Twitter creating a “Manipulated Media” label. Facebook recently launched a deepfake detection challenge in which the winning algorithm could only detect deepfakes with an average accuracy of 65.18% (not super reassuring).

Deepfake引起了很大争议。 对它们的React包括国会提出了《 恶意的深造假禁令》和《 DEEPFAKES问责制法案》 ， Facebook禁止深造假以及Twitter创建了“操纵的媒体”标签 。 Facebook最近发起了一次Deepfake检测挑战 ，其中获胜的算法只能以65.18％的平均准确度检测Deepfake(无法保证)。

While I agree that the propagation of deepfakes has concerning implications, the public and private response to deepfakes is ignoring two critical points:

尽管我同意深层仿冒的传播具有影响，但公共和私人对深层仿冒的回应却忽略了两个关键点：

1)假货不是镇上唯一的游戏 (1) Deep fakes aren’t the only game in town)

Media manipulation to deceive or discredit has been around as long as there has been media. During the 2004 election, a forged image was released showing John Kerry speaking with Jane Fonda at an anti-Vietnam War protest in an effort to discredit him — it was even run in The New York Times.

只要存在媒体，就可以进行欺骗或抹黑的媒体操纵。 在2004年大选期间，一张伪造的图像被发布，显示约翰·克里在一次反越南战争抗议活动中与简·芳达(Jane Fonda)讲话，以抹黑他-甚至在《纽约时报》上也曾报道过 。

During the Rodney King trials in 1991, the video evidence of King being beaten by four police officers was purposely slowed down before being shown to the jury so that King’s involuntary physical movements appeared as if he was trying to get up. The jurors who delivered a “not guilty” verdict were quoted saying the slowed down video evidence “made all the difference” (LA Times).

在1991年的罗德尼·金(Rodney King)审判期间，故意削弱了金被四名警察殴打的视频证据，然后才被带到陪审团，以便金的非自愿身体运动看起来像他试图站起来一样。 引用作出“无罪”判决的陪审员的话说，放慢的视频证据“使一切都变了”(《 洛杉矶时报》 )。

Even recently, two of the most discussed manipulated videos were not deepfakes, but “cheapfakes” — videos that are slowed down or selectively edited using traditional video editing techniques:

甚至在最近，讨论最多的两个操纵视频不是伪造的，而是“便宜货”(使用传统的视频编辑技术放慢或选择性编辑的视频)：

1. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi appearing to slur her words — widely shared across Facebook and retweeted by Trump.

   众议院议长南希·佩洛西(Nancy Pelosi)似乎很lur口 -在Facebook上广泛分享并由特朗普转发。

2. CNN Reporter Jim Acosta appearing to strike a White House intern while reaching for the mic — tweeted by White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders

   CNN记者吉姆·阿科斯塔(Jim Acosta)伸手摘麦克风时似乎在白宫实习生的身影- 白宫新闻秘书莎拉·桑德斯(Sarah Sanders)发表

Because those two videos were not actual deepfakes, they would not be detected by deepfake algorithms or covered under Facebook and Twitter’s content policies.

由于这两个视频不是真正的伪造品，因此它们不会被Deepfake算法检测到，也不会受到Facebook和Twitter内容政策的保护。

2)伪造品的真正危险在于他们是否怀疑合法媒体 (2) The true danger of deepfakes is the doubt they cast on legitimate media)

“It’s not just that you might make people believe that something that’s fake is real, but that you might make them believe that something that’s real is fake.”

“不仅仅是让人们相信假货是真实的，而且还可以使他们相信假货是真实的。”

— Lillian Edwards Professor of Law, Innovation, and Society at Newcastle University.

—纽卡斯尔大学Lillian Edwards法学，创新与社会教授。

While it is possible to prove that a video is fake, it is much more difficult to conclusively prove that a video is real. This uncertainty caused by deepfakes has already destabilized national politics and led to a failed military coup in the African country of Gabon.

尽管有可能证明视频是伪造的，但要最终证明视频是真实的要困难得多。 假货造成的这种不确定性已经破坏了国家政治的稳定，并导致非洲国家加蓬的军事政变失败 。

Deepfake doubt is not only a weapon against those in power. It can be effectively wielded by those in power to discredit their opposition. According to Sam Gregory, Program Director at Witness, a nonprofit that helps people document human rights abuses, activists and citizens in Brazil worry that video evidence of an officer killing a civilian will be dismissed as a deepfake and will no longer be sufficient grounds for an investigation (MIT Technology Review).

深刻的怀疑不仅是对抗当权者的武器。 执政者可以有效地抹黑他们的反对派。 见证人计划主任山姆·格雷戈里(Sam Gregory)说，这是一家非营利组织，可帮助人们记录侵犯人权的行为， 巴西的活动人士和公民担心，视频中有关杀害一名平民的军官的证据将被当作是假冒的东西 ，将不再是足够的理由。调查( 麻省理工学院技术评论 )。

While it is possible to prove that a video is fake, it is much more difficult to conclusively prove that a video is real.

尽管有可能证明视频是伪造的，但要最终证明视频是真实的要困难得多。

该怎么办？ (What can be done?)

Detecting or banning deepfakes is not enough. Cheapfakes or other traditionally edited media can avoid detection and cause just as much harm. Inability to verify authenticity of media can be used to fuel or suppress political dissent.

仅检测或禁止深度欺诈是不够的。 便宜货或其他传统编辑的媒体可以避免检测，并造成同样多的危害。 无法验证媒体的真实性可被用来助长或压制政治异议。

We cannot rely on media platforms to solve this problem for us:

我们不能依靠媒体平台为我们解决这个问题：

1. They can’t — again, the winning deepfake detection algorithm only works 62% of the time他们不能-再次，成功的Deepfake检测算法仅在62％的时间内起作用
2. They don’t want to — edited media and the resulting buzz drive traffic to Facebook and Twitter他们不想要-编辑媒体，由此引起的嗡嗡声将流量吸引到Facebook和Twitter
3. They shouldn’t — relying solely on social media platforms to verify the veracity of media will only further power their control over the media we consume他们不应该-仅依靠社交媒体平台来验证媒体的准确性，只会进一步增强他们对我们消费的媒体的控制力

If we cannot rely on detecting deepfakes, we need a way to verify media at the point of capture, prevent it from being edited, and maintain that verification even after it has been shared.

如果我们不能依靠检测Deepfake，则需要一种方法来在捕获时验证媒体，防止媒体被编辑，甚至在共享之后也要保持该验证。

This is where Apple comes in.

这就是苹果公司进来的地方。

在iPhone上拍摄 (Shot on iPhone)

The iPhone camera has long been a major selling point for Apple. This campaign, and others like it, highlight what the iPhone camera stands for: quality. Now Apple has the opportunity for the iPhone camera to stand for something new: truth.

长期以来，iPhone相机一直是苹果的主要卖点。 该活动以及其他类似活动强调了iPhone相机代表的意义：质量。 现在，苹果有机会让iPhone相机代表新的事物：事实。

Now Apple has the opportunity for the iPhone camera to stand for something new: truth.

现在，苹果有机会让iPhone相机代表新的事物：事实。

There are currently 900M active iPhones in use, around 1 iPhone for every 8 people in the world. Photos and videos taken on an iPhone are automatically sent to iCloud and are encrypted both during transit (going from your phone to Apple’s servers) and at rest (being stored by Apple). iPhone users are able to create shared albums to give other iPhone users access to their photos stored in iCloud.

当前有9 亿部活动iPhone正在使用中 ，全球每8个人中就有1部iPhone。 在iPhone上拍摄的照片和视频会自动发送到iCloud，并在运输过程中(从手机到Apple的服务器)和静止时(由Apple存储)进行加密 。 iPhone用户可以创建共享相册，以使其他iPhone用户可以访问他们存储在iCloud中的照片。

With this system already in place, my question is: how difficult would it be for Apple to verify that a photo or video was shot on an iPhone, encrypted, and sent to iCloud without being edited in any way? Additionally, how difficult would it be for an iPhone user to then be able to share that media with other Apple users while maintaining the encryption/authentication?

有了这个系统之后，我的问题是：对于苹果来说，验证照片或视频在iPhone上拍摄，加密并发送到iCloud而无需进行任何编辑的难度有多大？ 此外，iPhone用户在保持加密/身份验证的同时能够与其他Apple用户共享该媒体有多困难？

How difficult would it be for Apple to verify that a photo or video was shot on an iPhone, encrypted, and sent to iCloud without being edited in any way?

对于Apple而言，验证照片或视频是在iPhone上拍摄，加密并发送到iCloud而不进行任何编辑的，将有多困难？

In full transparency, I am not privy to the specific details of how iCloud uploads work, so I can’t give a definitive answer. That being said, I do have experience building apps featuring media capture and upload for two different companies (elovee, my current company, and BigSpring, a past client), so I know enough to make an educated guess. I also have some smart and generous software engineer friends that I bugged for answers. Our professional opinion: not that difficult.

在完全透明的情况下，我不了解有关iCloud上传的具体细节，因此我无法给出确切的答案。 话虽这么说，我有经验建设应用为特色的两个不同的公司(媒体捕获和上传elovee ，我目前的公司，并BigSpring ，过去的客户)，所以我知道足以让一个受过教育的猜测。 我也有一些聪明大方的软件工程师朋友，我一直在寻找答案。 我们的专业意见：没那么困难。

The mechanisms are already in place to encrypt media at the point-of-capture, automatically transmit the encrypted media to iCloud, and share that media with others while maintaining the at-rest encryption. Apple already offers end-to-end encryption for some iCloud date (iMessage, health data, etc). If they were to extend E2E encryption to photos/videos, then even Apple would not be able to edit them.

该机制已经到位，可以在捕获点对媒体进行加密，自动将加密的媒体传输到iCloud，并在保持静态加密的同时与其他人共享该媒体。 苹果已经为某些iCloud日期(iMessage，运行状况数据等)提供了端到端加密。 如果他们将E2E加密扩展到照片/视频，那么即使Apple也无法对其进行编辑。

Again, this an educated guess. (If any current or former Apple engineers are reading this and want to tell me how wrong I am, please email me at ren@gee.rs. I’m dying to know).

同样，这是有根据的猜测。 (如果任何现任或前任Apple工程师正在阅读本手册，并想告诉我我错了，请给我发电子邮件ren@gee.rs 。我很想知道)。

苹果认证 (Apple Verified)

Once Apple has created the foundation to verify captured media and distribute it while maintaining that verification, there are many fun ways they can capitalize on it.

一旦苹果公司创建了验证捕获的媒体并在维护验证的同时分发它的基础，他们就有许多有趣的方法可以利用它。

Likely:

可能：

1. Only allow “Apple Verified” media to be shared between iPhone/iPad/Mac users via iMessage, Airdrop, or iCloud仅允许通过iMe​​ssage，Airdrop或iCloud在iPhone / iPad / Mac用户之间共享“ Apple验证”媒体
2. Create a “TrustKit” framework that allows developers to incorporate “Apple Verified” media into their iPhone applications创建一个“ TrustKit”框架，使开发人员可以将“ Apple验证”媒体整合到他们的iPhone应用程序中
3. Promote Apple News+ as the most trusted source for “Apple Verified” news将Apple News +宣传为“ Apple验证”新闻的最受信任来源

Less Likely:

比较不可能：

1. Create a sandboxed photo/video editing tool (Mac only) that allows limited adjustments to media while maintaining verification创建一个沙盒照片/视频编辑工具(仅适用于Mac)，该工具允许对媒体进行有限的调整，同时保持验证
2. Create an iPhone Pro for journalists/etc who need a camera that can capture high quality “Apple Verified” media为需要可捕获高质量“ Apple验证”媒体的相机的记者/等创建iPhone Pro

我们为什么要相信苹果？ (Why would we trust Apple?)

Now I know what you’re thinking: I just said we can’t trust Facebook/Twitter to address manipulated media and then immediately afterwards said we should trust Apple. I know how this looks, trust me.

现在，我知道您在想什么：我只是说过我们不信任Facebook / Twitter处理可操纵的媒体，然后紧接着说我们应该信任Apple。 我知道这看起来如何，相信我。

But this isn’t because I own all Apple products (I do), have read the Steve Jobs biography multiple times (I have), or think Tim Cook is more trustworthy than Zuckerberg (I mean, come on). The reason I trust Apple to do this more than any other tech company or even the government (especially the government) is because doing so aligns with their motivations.

但这不是因为我拥有所有苹果产品(我拥有)，或者多次阅读史蒂夫·乔布斯传记(我拥有)，或者不是因为蒂姆·库克比扎克伯格更值得信赖(我是说，来)。 我比其他任何一家科技公司甚至政府(尤其是政府)更相信苹果能做到这一点的原因是，这样做符合他们的动机。

The reason I trust Apple to do this more than any other tech company or even the government (especially the government) is because doing so aligns with their motivations.

我比其他任何科技公司甚至政府(尤其是政府)都更信任苹果，这是因为这样做符合他们的动机。

I have spent my career focused on using technology to improve lives, but I am actually a very pessimistic person when it comes to companies or people doing the right thing (including me). I believe you can’t rely on goodwill or companies/people doing the right thing just because it’s the right thing to do.

我的职业生涯一直专注于使用技术改善生活，但是对于公司或做正确的事情的人(包括我)，我实际上是一个非常悲观的人。 我相信您不能仅仅因为这是正确的事情就依赖商誉或公司/人员来做正确的事情。

To drive sustainable change, you need to understand their motivations and either create new incentives or align with existing incentives to drive the desired positive behavior. In this specific case, Apple’s incentives to do the right thing align with their business strategy.

为了推动可持续的变革，您需要了解他们的动机，或者创建新的动机，或者与现有动机保持一致，以推动理想的积极行为。 在这种特定情况下，苹果采取正确行动的动机与他们的业务战略相吻合。

苹果的商业策略 (Apple’s Business Strategy)

Apple makes money by selling us beautiful hunks of metal and glass and then charging a fee for the money we spend to have different sets of 1s and 0s light up pixels on the screen. This is the main difference between Apple and Google/Facebook. The latter relies on accumulating as much data and eyeballs as possible so they can use that data to more efficiently sell stuff to those eyeballs.

苹果公司通过向我们出售漂亮的金属和玻璃来赚钱，然后对我们花了钱让不同的1和0组点亮屏幕上的像素收取费用。 这是Apple与Google / Facebook之间的主要区别。 后者依赖于积累尽可能多的数据和眼球，以便他们可以使用该数据更有效地将商品出售给那些眼球。

“We at Apple believe that privacy is a fundamental human right”

“苹果公司认为隐私是一项基本人权”

— Tim Cook

蒂姆·库克

Apple has publicly supported data privacy and protection for years (2013; 2015), but as Ben Thompson has repeatedly pointed out on his blog Stratechery (2013; 2015) this has mainly been a Strategy Credit — “an uncomplicated decision that makes a company look good relative to other companies who face much more significant trade-offs”.

苹果多年来一直公开支持数据隐私和保护( 2013 ； 2015 )，但是正如本·汤普森在其博客Stratechery( 2013 ； 2015 )中反复指出的那样，这主要是一种策略荣誉-“一个简单的决定使公司看起来很简单。相对于面临更多重大折衷的其他公司而言，这是一个很好的选择。”

Standing up for data privacy makes Apple look good compared to Google, and so Apple has gone all in, even going as far as refusing the FBI’s requests to build backdoors into iPhones.

与Google相比，捍卫数据隐私使Apple看起来不错，因此Apple竭尽全力，甚至拒绝了FBI要求在iPhone中构建后门程序的要求。

And to their credit, their actions match their words. Let’s do a quick comparison:

值得赞扬的是，他们的举止与言语相吻合。 让我们做一个快速比较：

Sources: Apple health data, Apple Wi-Fi, Apple Cards, Apple security video, Google health data, Google Wi-Fi, Google-Mastercard, Ring employee access, Ring law enforcement

来源 ： Apple健康数据 ， Apple Wi-Fi ， Apple卡 ， Apple安全视频 ， Google健康数据 ， Google Wi-Fi ， Google MasterCard ， 环网员工访问权限 ， 环网执法

汇集全部 (Bringing it all together)

Again, it is much easier for Apple to make these decisions because their business model is based on selling hardware and apps vs selling advertisements. Apple is using this difference as a competitive advantage to earn consumer trust and position themselves as the privacy provider.

同样，对于苹果公司来说，做出这些决定要容易得多，因为他们的商业模式是基于销售硬件和应用程序而不是销售广告。 苹果公司利用这种差异作为竞争优势来赢得消费者的信任，并将自己定位为隐私提供者。

At its core, Apple’s privacy strategy is about trust.

苹果公司的隐私策略的核心是信任。

• “Trust us with your contacts.”“相信我们与您的联系。”
• “Trust us with your messages.”“用您的信息信任我们。”
• “Trust us with your photos/videos”“相信我们的照片/视频”

And that trust already partially extends into verification.

这种信任已经部分扩展到了验证。

• “Trust us that the person on the other line is who you think it is.”“让我们相信，另一边的人就是你认为的那个人。”
• “Trust us that your friend actually sent you that text.”“相信我们，您的朋友实际上向您发送了该文本。”

Apple is uniquely positioned to double down on that trust and position itself as as the source for trusted media. We already trust Apple enough to give all of our personal data, why not also trust them to verify the authenticity of the media we consume?

苹果拥有独特的地位，可以加倍信任，并将自己定位为可信赖媒体的来源。 我们已经足够信任Apple来提供我们的所有个人数据，为什么还不信任它们来验证我们使用的媒体的真实性呢？

结论 (Conclusion)

Before I wrap up, I want to caveat everything above by stating that this isn’t the be-all, end-all solution. There are still things Apple can’t solve, such as creating fake media using lookalikes, trimming videos to remove necessary context, sharing real media under false pretenses, or the emotional trauma of having deepfake porn (SFW) made using your face.

在总结之前，我想通过声明这不是万能的，最终的解决方案来对以上所有内容进行说明。 苹果仍然无法解决某些问题，例如使用外观创建伪造的媒体 ， 修剪视频以删除必要的上下文 ， 以假借口分享真实的媒体 ，或者使用您的脸庞制作深造色情 (SFW)所造成的情感创伤。

Media manipulation is a systemic issue that requires a systems solution. We still need to pressure social media platforms to prevent the spread of misinformation and we still need to educate people to think critically and not blindly believe everything they are told.

媒体操纵是一个系统性问题，需要系统解决方案。 我们仍然需要向社交媒体平台施加压力，以防止错误信息的传播，我们仍然需要教育人们进行批判性思考，而不是盲目相信他们所听到的一切。

“Apple Verified” won’t solve everything, and could cause even bigger problems in the future that I haven’t considered (tell me all about it in the comments), but it is a fairly easy, tangible step in what I hope is the right direction and at the very least can help people record and verify oppression by those in power.

“ Apple验证”并不能解决所有问题，并且将来可能会引起我尚未考虑的更大问题(在评论中告诉我所有问题)，但这是我所希望的相当简单，切实的步骤正确的方向，至少可以帮助人们记录和验证当权者的压迫。