Here's the thing though: in theory, we should already be skeptical of video and audio evidence on its own.
Most of our institutions, in theory, do not focus on single mediums for assessing veracity of truth. The strength of claims and our ability to split the difference between noise and truth comes down to corroboration. How many other sources strength and work consistently with a claim? That's, in theory, how law enforcement, intelligence, and reporting should work.
In practice, there are massive gaps here and people's attention -> decision is lower than ever.
I don't think it's impossible for us to handle deep fakes, but I sense the same fear you have. I think ultimately it is more about our attention spans, and the "urgency" we feel to act quickly, that will be more of our down fall than the ability to produce fakes more easily.
You don't in fact need a convincing fake to create a powerful conspiracy theory. Honestly you only need an emotional provocation, maybe even some green text on an anonymous web form.
Most of our institutions, in theory, do not focus on single mediums for assessing veracity of truth. The strength of claims and our ability to split the difference between noise and truth comes down to corroboration. How many other sources strength and work consistently with a claim? That's, in theory, how law enforcement, intelligence, and reporting should work.
In practice, there are massive gaps here and people's attention -> decision is lower than ever.
I don't think it's impossible for us to handle deep fakes, but I sense the same fear you have. I think ultimately it is more about our attention spans, and the "urgency" we feel to act quickly, that will be more of our down fall than the ability to produce fakes more easily.
You don't in fact need a convincing fake to create a powerful conspiracy theory. Honestly you only need an emotional provocation, maybe even some green text on an anonymous web form.