Die Menschheit ist nur einen überzeugenden Deepfake von einer globalen Katastrophe entfernt

„Last year marked the [40th anniversary](https://zwly9k6z.r.us-east-1.awstrack.me/L0/https:%2F%2Fwww.vox.com%2F2018%2F9%2F26%2F17905796%2Fnuclear-war-1983-stanislav-petrov-soviet-union/1/0100018f0ba7e4b1-5f6eada8-6dab-47e6-a581-a9becd480bc6-000000/0JhcGPxOU0OSp4uKJ_K4Sj8wNU8=371) of the almost-apocalypse. 

On Sept. 26, 1983, Russian Lt. Col. Stanislav Petrov [declined to report](https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/09/the-man-who-saved-the-world-by-doing-absolutely-nothing/280050/) to his superiors information he suspected to be false, which detailed an inbound U.S. nuclear strike. His inaction prevented a Russian retaliatory strike and the global nuclear exchange it would have precipitated. He thus saved billions of lives.

Today, the job of Petrov’s descendants is much harder, chiefly due to rapid advancements in artificial intelligence. Imagine a scenario where Petrov receives similar alarming news, but it is backed by hyper-realistic footage of missile launches and a slew of other audio-visual and text material portraying the details of the nuclear launch from the United States.

It is hard to imagine Petrov making the same decision. This is the world we live in today.

Although a nuclear confrontation based on fake intelligence may seem unlikely, the stakes during crises are high and timelines are short, creating situations where fake data could well tilt the balance toward nuclear war.“

The national security risks extend beyond nuclear exchange.

The concern among U.S. officials about Russia’s continuing [disinformation campaign](https://www.rand.org/pubs/commentary/2022/09/debunking-russian-lies-about-biolabs-at-upcoming-un.html) about American military-biological labs in Ukraine not only stems from its potential to delegitimize the Ukrainian war effort but also something more sinister. If Ukrainians started getting sick because of a novel pathogen in Donetsk, and it began to spread across Europe, Putin’s regime could leverage the last 18 months of propaganda to assign blame to the U.S., making the attribution of biological attacks — already a difficult task in conflict zones — that much harder.

The problem of fake information is also relevant at the level of response. As COVID-19 demonstrated, the [proliferation of misinformation](https://zwly9k6z.r.us-east-1.awstrack.me/L0/https:%2F%2Fwww.kff.org%2Fcoronavirus-covid-19%2Fpress-release%2Fcovid-19-misinformation-is-ubiquitous-78-of-the-public-believes-or-is-unsure-about-at-least-one-false-statement-and-nearly-at-third-believe-at-least-four-of-eight-false-statements-tested%2F/1/0100018f0ba7e4b1-5f6eada8-6dab-47e6-a581-a9becd480bc6-000000/4RuvqELMlUxFVSwyKjwz-ynpr28=371) led to a less effective public health response and many more infections and deaths. A future response could be significantly hampered by ordinary citizens’ ability to [manufacture compelling false information](https://www.axios.com/2023/11/14/ai-deepfake-health-misinformation-fake-pictures-videos) about a pathogen’s origins and remedies, mirroring the quality and style of a scientific journal.“

As a species, we will have to seriously rethink our news cycle habit, temper our media consumption, and come up with a fast and reliable loop to verify commentary especially by public figures with critical influence.

For example, if a clip went viral of Biden saying he was having Trump thrown into a FEMA camp, of course it would spread like wildfire among the MAGA crowd and be taken as gospel before anyone lifted a finger to fact check it.

But we know where Biden is, like at all times. It is trivial for journalists to check with his press secretary or other sources immediately. This should be built into our public discourse forevermore.

Clip surfaces. Reporter sees the socials going wild, hits the WH switchboard. Statement not only refuted, but clarification is added as to why he wouldn’t have said it. This happens live, covered by multiple sources. Clip is seen to be the fake that it is, or at least doesn’t go uncontested.

Further, since we (almost) all know this to be the case, we share responsibility to take incendiary statements with a grain of salt. So simple, yet so glaringly lacking for people to just ask „Did they really say that?“ and make one or two extra clicks before sharing.

As much as AI is instrumental in creating this problem, it can also help mitigate the problem, should we use it responsibly.

I already know I ask too much, though. If civilization ends, it’s most likely going to be because of some stupid shit that was entirely preventable with even the most basic application of critical thinking.