The consequences of Adobe's VoCo
Today I came across a video that was very interesting, but also very alarming. On Adobe Creative Cloud's Youtube channel, they demonstrated the ability to basically Photoshop your voice. In the demonstration, they had a voice sample. The program translated the sample into words. The user was then able to edit the string, creating a new sentence. When the voice sample was played back, it was nearly indistinguishable from the original sample. Not only was the presenter able to manipulate the original sample, but he was able to create entirely new content that sounded just like the originally speaker.
In the presentation, the issue of malicious intent was immediately addressed. They claimed that voice samples would be "watermarked", so that the manipulated sample could be distinguished from the original sample. Skeptics and conspiracy theorists such as myself are quick to disregard the presenter's claim. After all, companies have been persuaded or forced to handover user information to the government. Yahoo, Apple, and Google, just to name a few, have given personal information to the government, exposing the fact that our accounts are not secure. If the government is so powerful, and companies willing to bend the knee to them, what could they possibly do with this technology?
Imagine a government who is eager to go to war with another. Perhaps there's a resource on those lands that hold a certain value. However, that government doesn't have a legitimate reason to go to war. Maybe there's hints at animosity, but no true reason that would call for boots on the ground. What if the government could persuade Adobe to create a voice sample without the watermark? Seriously, given what we've seen so far, is that really so unimaginable? Maybe a voice sample is created of the opposing country giving a speech declaring war, along with an awkwardly recorded, low resolution video. Suddenly our government has a reason to invade.
It doesn't even have to be something of that scale either. If there's an enemy of the state who doesn't have a crime quite severe enough to be arrested, perhaps a voice sample is created to incriminate them? An employer who is eager to fire the old timer with a large salary could have a false voice recording held against him, giving grounds for termination. This technology could have heavy consequences when used maliciously. We have evidence so far to believe that is a possibility.
With the terrifying cons out of the way, what are some positive benefits of such a tool? When voice actors pass away in the middle of production, a new voice actor will need to be hired. That new voice actor may not bring the character to life as well as the original. For me, that man is Tony Jay. His voice was absolutely perfect for cartoon villains. Since he passed away, one of my favorite shows "Reboot" will never get the finally that it deserved. No one could do Megabyte quite as well as Tony Jay could.
If one of the lead singers of a band passed away, then band is never the same. The harmony that the singer created just can't be recreated. Another example is using the technology, in combination with some of the virtual reality uses we've seen, to create a living museum. We could create a completely immersive recreation of a World War 2 battle, with a general narrating the battle to the visitor.
Adobe's VoCo could have some really awesome uses, however I just fear that the benefits are not worth the risk. This kind of manipulation in the hands of the those with poor conscience could cause mayhem. War could rage, assassinations, incarceration, unemployment, and other potential scenarios outside of my imagination. Are the benefits really worth it? America already has some pretty serious trust issues with the government. With even more methods of manipulation at their disposal, the rift can only divide even further. Perhaps in another age, we won't have reason to fear this technology.
In the presentation, the issue of malicious intent was immediately addressed. They claimed that voice samples would be "watermarked", so that the manipulated sample could be distinguished from the original sample. Skeptics and conspiracy theorists such as myself are quick to disregard the presenter's claim. After all, companies have been persuaded or forced to handover user information to the government. Yahoo, Apple, and Google, just to name a few, have given personal information to the government, exposing the fact that our accounts are not secure. If the government is so powerful, and companies willing to bend the knee to them, what could they possibly do with this technology?
Imagine a government who is eager to go to war with another. Perhaps there's a resource on those lands that hold a certain value. However, that government doesn't have a legitimate reason to go to war. Maybe there's hints at animosity, but no true reason that would call for boots on the ground. What if the government could persuade Adobe to create a voice sample without the watermark? Seriously, given what we've seen so far, is that really so unimaginable? Maybe a voice sample is created of the opposing country giving a speech declaring war, along with an awkwardly recorded, low resolution video. Suddenly our government has a reason to invade.
It doesn't even have to be something of that scale either. If there's an enemy of the state who doesn't have a crime quite severe enough to be arrested, perhaps a voice sample is created to incriminate them? An employer who is eager to fire the old timer with a large salary could have a false voice recording held against him, giving grounds for termination. This technology could have heavy consequences when used maliciously. We have evidence so far to believe that is a possibility.
With the terrifying cons out of the way, what are some positive benefits of such a tool? When voice actors pass away in the middle of production, a new voice actor will need to be hired. That new voice actor may not bring the character to life as well as the original. For me, that man is Tony Jay. His voice was absolutely perfect for cartoon villains. Since he passed away, one of my favorite shows "Reboot" will never get the finally that it deserved. No one could do Megabyte quite as well as Tony Jay could.
If one of the lead singers of a band passed away, then band is never the same. The harmony that the singer created just can't be recreated. Another example is using the technology, in combination with some of the virtual reality uses we've seen, to create a living museum. We could create a completely immersive recreation of a World War 2 battle, with a general narrating the battle to the visitor.
Adobe's VoCo could have some really awesome uses, however I just fear that the benefits are not worth the risk. This kind of manipulation in the hands of the those with poor conscience could cause mayhem. War could rage, assassinations, incarceration, unemployment, and other potential scenarios outside of my imagination. Are the benefits really worth it? America already has some pretty serious trust issues with the government. With even more methods of manipulation at their disposal, the rift can only divide even further. Perhaps in another age, we won't have reason to fear this technology.
Comments
Post a Comment