Amy Klobuchar Wants To Break The Internet Because Someone Made A Stupid Satirical Video About Her

An AI generated video of her saying something she never actually said in real life*

And which is painfully obviously satire, even if it's stupid and mean.
Satire is protected speech for a reason.
There are better ways to fight this than giving Republicans even more tools to censor their critics.
That South Park deepfake ad dogging Donald Trump that everyone loves so much would technically be illegal under her proposed rules as well.
Deepfakes are a real problem, but this is a stupid, short-sighted solution.
- The deepfake puts it into murky waters for me.
  If you have an actor who is obviously not the person represented saying a bunch of stupid and mean shit, I’ll defend your right to do it while also calling you a worthless piece of shit for thinking something so mean and petty is funny. This is basically the MadTV model and it has a right to exist for sure.
  Deepfakes feel different. The ridiculous realism casts it in a light that feels a lot more like misinformation, which I do not believe is defensible, in the same way yelling fire in a crowded theater isn’t defensible.
  I’m not saying it should be banned, but I guess I’m more open to like a serious and healthy debate over it.
- Luckily this video is over the top. If that script is a bit more subtle, with a more serious tone, saying stuff that has a different message but in a way that she would typically phrase it, they could have her promoting fascist or nazi messages just as easily. She would have to start denying every video that was ever made about her.
  Its not okay. Never will be.
  Its not satire at that point. Its impersonating a representative of the people and spreading a message of hate that she wouldn't support in real life. Not saying it has happened yet, but it could have just as easily been done.
  Do we get ahead of it now? Or wait until you cant tell whats real or fake?

This is simply impossible. The oly real solution to this problem (which will get much worse) is digitally signing genuine content rather than trying to stamp out fakes. If it doesn't have a signature, assume it's a fake.

How do you determine what is genuine, and who holds the keys to digital signing?
- You can look up what Adobe are doing in this space.
  Long-term it's going to be something like every secure device comes with its own inbuilt unit for cryptographically signing the raw files. These signatures can then be matched against manufacturers databases of approved signatures.
  This doesn't guarantee that nothing has been tampered with, but it does provide a link back to the original device allowing you to inspect it.
  There are huge privacy concerns as well, anything that's used to indicate authenticity can be used to track.
Fake signature. Checkmate.
Mic drop

Luckily she's a Democrat so nobody will take her seriously.

I agree with Techdirt's ultimate opposition to the no fakes act. But in a world where Trump and the GOP are taken seriously, this is NOT obvious satire.

That is why I am again working across the aisle on a bill to give all Americans more control over how deepfakes of our voices and visual likenesses are used. The proposed bipartisan NO FAKES Act, cosponsored by Senators Chris Coons, Marsha Blackburn, Thom Tillis and me, would give people the right to demand that social media companies remove deepfakes of their voice and likeness, while making exceptions for speech protected by the First Amendment.

The thing that should actually be bolded here is that it's cosponsored by Marsha fucking Blackburn.
- Nah, the article headline is shit because it is expressing that it's "breaking the internet", but she's not going after free speech. She wants major companies to label or take down deep fakes if asked. Hyperbole much?

Old people should be soylent greened.

I would love a socially and not legally adopted "/s" on altered content (that's a pretty broad brush) when it isn't obvious it's satire- maybe just in general (I'm kinda dumb). I don't know who this person is, and, while a bit of research would have revealed this a fake, I can see less with-it people, as well as anyone motivated to believe this is true, just believing it. I catch myself just believing things that confirm m'bias all the time (sad!)!