In late we were here until one in the morning but those from Armed Services were here until about five or six in the morning. So we may have a fewfe groggy members here on the committee. In the heat of the 2016 election as a russian hacking operation was apparent my predominant concern is that they began dumping forged documents along with the real ones that they stole it would be too easy for russia to see forgedse documents in a way to make it almost impossible to identify to review the fraudulent material. Unit they could expose it the damageag would be done. Three years later we on the cusp of a technological revolution with more sinister forms of deception by actors foreign or domestic leading to the emergence of doctored media called the deepfake that allows malicious actors to have the capacity to disrupt entire campaigns including the presidency. With the progress of Artificial Intelligence algorithms makes it p possible to manipulate video imagery with imperceptible results. The sufficient trainingt data these algorithms can portray a real person doing something they never did or to say words they never uttered this is still readily available and accessible to expertss and novices that the attribution to a specific author from an Intelligence Service or a single troll is a constant challenge. Want somebody views the deepfake video the damages donet to convince them that they have seen i a forgery they may never lose the negative impression it has left withiv them. Its also the case not only the fake videos are passed off as real but real information can be passed off as fake this is the liars dividendn that people are given the benefit of an environment is increasingly difficult for the public to determine what is true. To give members a sense of the quality today want to share some examples and even these are not stateoftheart. From Bloomberg Businessweek to demonstrate the clone voice of one of the journalist so lets watch. We will put my voice to the testy and call my mother to see if she recognizes me. Hey mom. What are you guys up to today quick. We didnt have any electricity this morning we are just hanging around the house. Of just finishing up work waiting for the boys to get hom home. Okay. I think im coming down with awi virus. You feel bad . [laughter] i was messing around with w you and you are talking to the computer. Its bad enough it is a fake but he deceives his mother that seems cruel. Coming from a puppetmaster with the deepfake video as you can see they can coopt the head movements of their targets to turn a world leader into a ventriloquist dummy. One next tori highlight research from the acclaimed expert with the face swap video it is transform on the body of an actress. Have never been so excited my package from l. L. Bean. [laughter] speedily time but the one on thepr left both for kate but it shows you how that technology can be. But those algorithms to make completely artificial portraits off persons. Can anyone here pick out which of these faces are real or fake . Of course, all four of those faces are fake and synthetically created. None of them are real. With 2020 and beyond the great imagination more nightmare scenarios leaving the public to discern what is real or fake. A bad state actor has a video of a candidate accepting a bribe with the goal to influence an election. If whether stolen audio of a private conversation between two worldbe leaders. A troll farm using algorithms to write false or sensational news stories or media platforms to verify end users ability t to trust. But this information becomes pernicious is the velocity of what false information can spread brick and we got a preview what that might look like when Nancy Pelosis video went viral in a matter of 48 hours. That was a crude manual manipulation somebody call the cheap fake nevertheless it shows the scale of the challenge we face and the responsibilities of social Media Companies must confront. Ready the companies have taken different approaches to lead the altar video facebook labeled it as false and then that spread was it was deemed fake by independent Fact Checkers. Now is the time for social Media Companies to put in place to protect users from this misinformationd. And after the 2020 elections , by then it iss too late. Keeping up with a series of hearings to National Security and institutions the committee is devoting this to deepfake and with those technologies on those platforms before we have those steps to mitigate rehab practitioners to helptu contextualize the threat before turning to them mode like to recognize the Ranking Member for any opening statement. Thanknk you mister chairman ten fake dossiers and everything else. I do think with all seriousness, this is real. You can see. [laughter] but with all seriousness i appreciate the panelist being here for your testimony. I yield back spank these Opening Statements are part of the record welcome to todays panel first the policy director of ai research and Technology Company based in San Francisco with that Data Task Force and next the director of Artificial Intelligence institute at the university of buffalo until last year he was referred to the darpa program. Danielle is professor of lot and has coauthored articles of the impact on National Security and democracy. And a distinguished Research Fellow but then that recent scholarship has addressed operations and welcome to all of you. Chairmanship fin Ranking Member, thank you for the invitation to testify about National Security threats posed byhe ai fake content with deepfake. What we are talking about when we discuss this is fundamentally we talk about Digital Technology making it easier for people to create synthetic media with video or audio or text people can manipulatete mini media for a long time but things have changed recently. There are two fundamental parts one continuing those advancements of computing capability of that physical hardware to run the Software Just got cheaper and more powerful and at the same time it has become increasingly accessible to make it dramatically easier and allows for a change of functionality like video and audio the forces driving the software are fundamental t the economy over the last few years so thinking about ai similar technologies the deepfake is likely to be used in research allowing people with hearing issues to a people are saying with those that could revolutionize some at the same time these can be used for purposes justifiably causing unease impersonate them on video we have seen researchers developing techniques allowing them to create them to do things that they havent necessarily done. They are potentially accelerated. So, how might we approach this challenge . I think for several interventions that we can make and this will improve the state of things. One is institutional intervention. It may be possible for the largescale Technology Platforms to try to develop and share tools for the detection of malicious synthetic media at both the individual account level and the platform level, and we could imagine the Companies Working together privately as they do today but cybersecurity where they exchange and 410 intelligence with each other and other actors to develop a shared understanding of what this looks like. We can also increase funding for as mentioned previously with the program here they are looking at the detection of these technologies and i think that it would be judicious to consider expanding the funding further survey can develop better insights here. I think we can measure this and what i mean by measurement is that its great we are here now i have 2020, but the technologies have been an open development for several years now and its possible for us to Read Research papers and code and talk to people when we could have created a quantitative metrics for the advancement of the technology for several years and i strongly believe that the government should be in the business of measuring and assessing these threats by looking at the scientific literature from which to work out the next steps being forewarned we have been thinking about different ways to release or talk about technology we developed and its challenging because science runs on openness and we need to preserve that so the science continues to move forward but we need to consider different ways of releasing technology or talking to people about the technology we are creating ahead of us releasing it. Finally, i think we need comprehensive ai education. None of this works if people dont know what they dont know so we need to give people the tools so they understand the technology has arrived. The testimony has made clear i dont think it is the cause of this. I think it is an excellen an aco an issue that has been with us for some time and we need to take steps to deal with this problem because it is very challenging. Thank you very much. Thank you, chairman schiff, Ranking Member nunes, thank you for the opportunity to be here this morning to discuss the challenges of countering the manipulation of scale. These variations of the phrase seeing is believing that in the past decades i was given the opportunity to join as a Program Manager and was able to address a variety of challenges facing the military and intelligence communities. Thats at the time was used by the frequency by our adversaries and its clear that process despite being carried out with the personnel and the government at the time couldnt appeal with the problem at the scale that the manipulative content was being created and proliferated. In the typical fashion the government got ahead of the problem knowing that it was a marathon, not a sprint and the program was designed to address both current and evolving capabilities not with a single point solution, but with comprehensive approach. Its unexpected however is the speed with which the Manipulation Technology wa techd evolve and in just the past five years, weve gone from a new technology that could produce the results at the time, but nowhere near what could be done manually with the basic desktop editing software. Open Source Software that can take the manual effort completely out of the patient and theres nothing fundamentally wrong about the Underlying Technology with the concernconcerns they are testifg about today like the basic desktop editors, its only a tool and theres a lot more positive applications of the networks then there are negative ones. As of today, there are Point Solutions that can identify these rely only but its only because the focus of this developing the technologies have been on the visual perceptions not covering up trace evidence i want to make it clear however that combating the manipulative media scale is not just a technical challenge he is a social one as well other witnesses will be testifying this morning we have to continue to do what we can if we need to get the tools and processes in the hands of individuals rather than relying completely on the government or social media platforms. If individuals can perform a sniff test and the media smells the misuse, they should have ways to verify it or prove it or report it. The same tool should be available to the press, social media sites, anyone who shares and uses this content because the truth of the matter is its part of the problem even though they dont know it. But the filtering of scale its not sufficient to only analyze question content afterthefact, we need to employ depictions of the fronten front end of the distribution pipeline. Its not what its purported to be and is independent of whether this is done and the decisions are made that there be no question this is a race but the better the detectors need to be in there is orders of magnitude more than there are detectors. Its also a race that we may never end. It may never be one. But it is one where we must close the gap and continue to make it less attractive to propagate the false information. It is easy and its always a problem and it may be the case that we can level the playing field. When the program was conceived, one thing that kept me up was the concern someda that maybe adversaries would be able to create and tired events with minimal effort. These might include images of scenes from different video content that appears from different devices and through various media providing overwhelmingly the phenomenon of deep faith and the risk they pose and with all can and should do about it. Im at the university of Maryland School of law. There are a few phenomenon that come together. To confirm the biases is particularly true when that information is lawful and negative. So the more salacious the more we are willing to pass upon. There are enterprises to have us click and share so when we bring all these things together, the provocative, it will be spread via really. There are so many harms mike walker and i have written about what the law can and should do about it, so there are concrete harms in the here and now for each individual. An investigative journalist in india who writes about government corruption and persecution of religious minority there was a provocative piece in 2018 and what followed was videos where her face was morphed into pornography and the first day it goes viral its on every social media site. It had her home address and the suggestion that she was available. The fallout was significant she had to withdraw from Online Platforms for several into the economic and social and psychological harm is profound and its true that in my work on cyber stalking, the phenomenon is going to be filled by women and minorities and for people who marginalized communities. Its not just we can imagine the deep hatre faith about the night before an ipo if timed just right with the ceo saying something he never said or did basically admitting to. The market will respond faster than we can debunk it. Im going to let him take some of the National Security concern like the taping of an election, but the next question is what do we do about it and i got the panel is going to be in a heated agreement that there is no silver bullet. We need a combination of all, markets and resilience to get through this. There are several claims that victims of targeted individuals can bring and sue for defamation, Emotional Distress with privacy to words. Criminal law offers too few letters for us to push. There are the criminal destination and impersonation walls and there is an impersonation of a Government Official statute thats really an act for the problems that we face today. So, we are amidst writing a model statute that we might deploy, one that is narrowly tailored that would address harmful, false impersonation, that would capture some of the harm here, but of course no practical hurdles for any solution. You have to be able to find them to prosecute them and youve got to have jurisdiction over them and so the platforms, the intermediaries are immune from liability so we cant use a legal incentive of liability to get them on the case. I see my time is running out. Thank you for your question. Members of the committee, thanks for having me here today. All foundations recognize the power of Artificial Intelligence to revolutionize economies and in paramilitaries but those countries with the most advanced capabilities and unlimited access to large data will gain enormous advantages and information warfare. Ai provides disinformation the ability to rapidly wreak the psychological vulnerabilities and create modified content and digital forgery advancing. Fullstop it is against americans and american interest. Historically each advancement from text to speech to video to the Virtual Reality deeply engages information consumers enriching the context of experiences and shaping the users reality. The falsification of loud at the manipulators to do highly convincing ways provoking emotional response to lead to widespread mistrust and have time physical mobilizations. False video and audio once consumed can be extremely difficult to refute an and coun. Moving forward underestimate russia has been in the ring this information will continue to pursue the acquisition of the capabilities and be adversaries around the world. The arrival of the u. S. That are powered by the data for the vast amounts of information stolen from the u. S. Into the country has already shown up at the for the Television Broadcast journalism. The will largely use this as part of the discredit for detractors and from the westernstyle democracies and free to start the reality of the american audiences and those of americas allies. The proliferation presents to dangers over the longterm development of the false synthetic media with target officials and institutions, democratic processes with the goal of demoralizing the american constituency. The conspiracies offer a relevant example of how the messages can feel violent. The capabilities will increase in frequency and intensity of these outbreaks will continue the interest in the developing world where the consumption has jumped from an inperson conversations to social media sharing lacking any form of the filter would be threatened by the bogus synthetic media campaigns. These would be mobilization of the embassy in cairo, the consulate and rumors of protest to the airbase had they been accompanied with fake audio or video content could have been far more damaging in terms of that and i would also point to a story just out hours ago from the Associated Press that shows the use of a synthetic picture as it would appear to be espionage purposes from the honeypot attack. Recent public discussions from the employment typically focus on the foreign adversaries with the greatest threat of proliferation may come not from abroad but from the home and from the private sector. I focused on the authoritarian nationstate and brought the chart here today with a range of manipulators in pursuit of their goals. Recent examples of misinformation said just it could be oligarchs, corporations, Political Action groups, activists with significant Financial Support that will seek out these capabilities and amplified the deep takes. The net effect will be the same degradation of the democratic institutions, elected officials and the electoral processes we can trust in the platforms and potentially sporadic violence by the false pretenses. I have several recommendations that i will hit a couple here in the remarks. Congress should implement legislation prohibiting officials and representatives at age us from creating the false content and the government must always be the purveyor of truth. Second policymakers should work with social Media Companies to develop standards for the content accountability in the thirand thirdthe government shor with private sector digital verification signatures designated in the future to be the physical origination and social Media Companies should enhance the labeling of content across the platforms and work as an industry to codify how and when it should be appropriately marked not often is it that areas in nature but information to the consumers should determine the source of the information and whether it is authentic. What is the most pressing right now is the government from the National Security perspective to maintain intelligence on the adversaries capability deploying the content or the proxies they employ to conduct such information. The department of state should immediately develop response plans for the smear campaigns and the violent mobilization overseas in the attempt to mitigate harm to the personnel and first and last, i echo my palace awareness of the signatures that will greatly assist in tamping down attempts to the democracy in violence. I would like to see us hope the public make better decisions about the content they are consuming and how to judge the content. Thank you. Two questions. Is it time to do away with the immunities of the platforms were able to maintain a certain standard of care it seems to me not very practical to think about bringing people to justice who are halfway around the world or the difficulties of retribution or the fact that given the cost of this technology now just how many people can employ it is it time to take that step . Was it appropriate for ones social Media Company even labeling it in a certain way to try to diminish his candidacy with should the u. S. Response be, should it be a Cyber Response realizing that that is only going to be one part of the problem. I am going to start with how broad the immunity is and that it is time for us to amended section 230. Its largely as a provision to allow the internet that was the object of the Communications Act any sub monitoring at all even if you encourage abuse that you are immune from liability that means revenge operators can say that they are immune liability while encouraging people to post their axes of those and they are right. The question is here we are now 25 years later the internet, weve got dominant players. Its not in its infancy and is it time to reassess, the answer is yes we should condition the immunity. It shouldnt be a free pass and it should be conditioned on a reasonable process. Weve written sort of a sample statute you could adopt if you so chose the worst condition. In any given case are they making the right choices and to look to the reasonableness you would look at the total and approach generically speaking out any decision so lets take i think the answer is should it have been taken down we have a default rule that if we are going to have impersonations or manipulation that do not reflect what we have done or said, then platforms should once they figure it out take it down. We cant ultimately figure that once we figure it out we are already in a place where the public has deep distrust. It has an audience primed to believe things like manipulated to show ofvideo of lawmakers and hate to see the deep ache where a prominent lawmaker is seen taking a bribe that was never taken, and i hope the platforms come to see themselves if we cant require them to have the legal liability that they can to see themselves as the purveyors of responsible facilitating this online and their importance to democracy. Id like to start off with a basic principle of information. The professor that studied the rumors his quote was once they are current a have a way of carrying the public with them and the more the possibility. He wrote that in 1944, and i think that is still essential. It comes down to who is their first and who is there the most and thats the danger of a social media propaganda with this. In terms of how we deal with this, there are several parts. One is we have to have a plan and its a multipart plan and the other we have to respond quickly. This hasnt been the tradition of the government. When there would be fake al qaeda propaganda to inspire people to show up late we have Rapid Response team that would show up with video and audio that would shoot video that showed this is true its been disproven. The great example about if this starts to get leaked out is our plan, the government for any Government Official or Government Agency should immediately offer a counter based on fact in terms of whats going on. This happened in 2016 at the air base there was the russian state sponsored propaganda put out about a potential coup may be the base was surrounded with her was a protest. We should be able to turn on the cameras immediately and say this is not happening. The faster we do that the last chance people see it often and believe it. Second, it comes down to the Political Parties republican and democrat as they have these coming through they should be able to rapidly refute that and puout andput out a basis of trus candidate for these candidates were not there but that means part should also with social media come needs. I actually wouldnt go as far as saying every piece of synthetic video that gets loaded up on the platform means it should come down and im glad you brought up the former Vice President biden. One of the classic articles about the Vice President comes from the onion and that she was waxing his camaro in the driveway of the white house. It was a comedy bit and had manipulated photos. If we went to the extreme we would have a country where everything thats been changed or modified for any reason would have to be policed and we would be asking a private company to police that so i would instead offered a different system which is triage. Social Media Companies how do they label content as authentic or not. The danger is the source isnt necessarily there. We saw that in 2016 and we saw that today they should refer back to the base was quickly. They should be able to triage. The three areas i would suggest they immediately triage triage f they see some spiking in terms of morality they should put that into the queue and have it up for review. Link to fact check, dont let it go to news feeds and help the Mainstream Media understand what this manipulated content. Thats the jump we are most concerned about. The other is outbreaks of violence and Public Safety and anything related to elected officials were Public Institutions should immediately be flagged and pulled down and checked context be given. I see it as the public needs to be given a context so we are not suppressing all freedom of speech, all development because there are legitimate reasons we might want to use synthetic media for entertainment, comedy, visualizations that are out there. I would love to follow up and see what the response would be to a foreign adversary if you give me 20 seconds i can tell you what it would be which is refuting the number one, number two, offensive cyber is in place and i like what the nsa has done in 2018 and number three, more aggressive responses in terms of sanctions where the content comes from. How do you put in filters if it is only a few of them i can tell you theres videos that go on and on and on what i was suggesting is that it would be impossible. We cant really detect it as far as the state of the art goes now or in the arms race would we be able to rea to read the filter d what was saying is that where it is a doctorate and impersonation its sort of rejuvenating for people to create it without themselves, so im not suggesting all of the deep ache. I agree mostly with you to challenge just is how do you implement. These are hard problems of content moderation. On the issue of the nonconsensual pornography threats and stalking and then its such a context or questions about you cant proactively filter, but when its reported the question is when we see videos going via role there is a way that come these should react and we act responsibly. There shouldnt be but rather is this a misrepresentation and a defamatory way that we would say it is a falsehood and harmful to reputations tha that we should e it down. That is the defaul default i am imagining for social Media Companies. Actually com, 1996, but built up to imagine as open Public Square where private companies could infiltrate the opposite. It was designed to encourage self monitoring and to provide an immunity in exchange for Good Samaritan filtering and blocking of sensitive contents of the entire premise is to encourage and provide immunity so that there was filtering and blocking. The politically traffic and abuse that encouraged illegality and they shouldnt enjoy immunity from liability. We are back to where we started. This is the challenge. How do we draft legislation that would enable that. So, section 230 now says no speaker or publisher or no Online Service shall be treated as a speaker or publisher essentially of someone elses content. What we can do is change the section to say no Online Service that engages in reasonable con tent practices shall be treated as a speaker or publisher of somebody elses content. So we can change it with some imagination. It depends on the definition of reasonableness. We impose strict liability and then we get somewhere in the middle and that is where negligence lives in reasonable practices. There are reasonable practices that are emerging in the past ten years. So we have a guide its just its not as if it is a new issue so we can come up with reasonable practices. Thank you. I will yield back, mr. Chair. I want to highlight something that is an intense interest to the community. You said something is happening where we can just turn on the cameras. Im not sure thats right because if you can create a fake theres no reason you cant from the camera to the screen. So the Intelligence Community obviously relies on the motion video and photographs into that sort of thing. One isnt just the threat we might think to look silly on youtube about the Intelligence Community using its own assets might not be able to tell fact from fiction when you say lets turn on the cameras im not sure that is enough. My other recommendation was digital verification which these folks will know better because they are more technically sound of an im. Digital verification for the location of content to include realtime content there is already a block chaining registry developed. Part of that would then be as a government if you turn on your cameras that could be verified by News Agencies and reporters he could use it in a lot of different ways but we need the ability to verify the content is real so if that sort of impersonation is done we can do it quickly and people will know which one to sort through. I will defer to them in terms of the technical but some of this is already being developed and i would want that accompanied with it. I understand there is no silver bullet. Take a minute or two and tell us where are we should we expect to have undetected within a year, two years, five years where are we today and how eminen imminene challenges this . Theres the risk of having an detectable content that gets modulated on and share online. Right now if you have a low resolution version, that can be destroyed, where it came from can be destroyed. The trace evidence can be destroyed with very simple types of manipulation on top of the deepfake process or any type of speculation. The challenge we have though is that we do have played solutions for the components but bringing them together in a useful way getting into the hands of everyone throughout the pipeline imagine if facebook or youtube or any of the other companies that have this upfront and when the reviewers reported 30,000 people to review content could have this ahead of time rather than say i have a question for something i need to review lengthy run this algorithm do that upfront so that you have a report associated with a particular image or video and benefits questions to put that warning up there. There are tools the social Media Companies use to link those together and make a decision and share it with everyone the same way as we do with our where for example cyber issues. Weve gotten to the point its now we are protecting our front door and need to protect them from images and video as well. I dont have time to cover this topic but i want to express myself. The theme of the hearing is how scary it is but one of the scary things ive heard this morning is your statement that the policy video should have been taken down. There should be this. I dont have a lot of time and there wont be time for you to answer but i want to have this conversation because as awful as we all thought the video was, theres got to be a difference if the russians put that up, which is one thing versus if mad magazine does it as a satire as you know better than me we dont have a lot of protections as public figures with respect to defamation and some of the language you used here today makes me wonder about First Amendment centuries long tradition of satirizing People Like Us so in anyway i simply just want to put that on the record and hope we have an opportunity to hear more about where that boundary lies and how we can protect the long tradition of the freedom of expression and with that i will yield back. Thank you all for being here. Weve come a long way i remember chevy chase playing gerald ford and he didnt even try to pretend to look like an then we see forrest gump which was a wonderful movie. It was entertainment and i remember sitting there thinking how do they do that. Ive always said out of everything bad is the chance to do something good about of everything good is the chance for people to do something bad and i think we see that. The way it sounds with where we are headed that sounds we are living in the truman show or something if weve got to be careful about that. But i think that out of that something good something bad can happen im sure the right brothers when they learned to fly didnt think maybe we can fly this and rebuilding someday, but thats what happens in this world unfortunately. But as a result of that, 9 11 for example, it takes a lot longer to get on a plane and for good reason. And i think where we need to be headed, and i want your opinion obviously, weve got to slow this down before something just hits it. And maybe we have to tell people before they see some think this is satire, its not real and in some way you have to verify that the same time that may be what we have to do, slow it down, triage it. This isnt verified, this is satire and maybe on a global scale when it comes to punitive measures the people that are doing things that various maybe we need extradition laws because when something comes from another country maybe even a friendly country, if its the same thing hurts someone here maybe we both agreed among those nations we will extradite those people and they can be punished in your country for what they did. I loved your opinion on that. The triage labeling and extradition who ever wants to take it first. I think that is right. One of the reasons these type of manipulated images is almost instantaneous but they can be shared around the world. They can be shared across platforms. You can see something on one platform and there is a button to post it to another. Theres an old adage that says a lot he can go halfway around the world before the truth can get its shoes on and thats true. Personally i dont see any reason why broadcast news does it with my types of, they have a 72nd delay. There is no reason why things have to be instantaneous. The social media can and still these kind of things to delay so that they use kind of things online to decide whether they should label it. Weve done this for Human Trafficking and they are serious about these things. Theres another area that is a little bit in the middle but im sure they can make the same effort to do that kind of triage. What you are about to see is satire enhanced and modified. One thing thats dressing as we will continue to be surprised by Technological Progress in this domain because a lot of this stuff people think that they are the right brothers and they feel that we would be so required to label it and there are some instances where we say labeling it just isnt good enough. Theres no counter speech to some. I would love to hear about the extradition laws and other punitive measures. Thank you mr. Chairman. You didnt really answer my colleagues question about how far away are we. I know you were working on that. Where are we either commercially or by government researchers to technologically able to detect these . It is referred to as a particular technology that there are certain thoughts out there for doing that. It is the initial paper that was published that came out after the start of the Metaphor Program and we did that to start looking at those things. There are solutions out there today that deepfake coming from these particular softwares can be detected. Do we have the technology to be able to digitally verified videos and photographs etc. . If you give me a particular video, with high confidence i can tell you whether this is a fake video and i can also come back and say here are the videos were the images that went into it. How long does that take, is it a matter of an hour or 30 minutes . It can be done with the constant delay the Political Parties prepare for the possibility of a deepfake content. One thing i think even on capitol hill and with the Political Parties urged the social Media Industry to Work Together to create unified standards. Part of the problem with all of these instances is if you are a manipulator you ar were going to to whatever platform allows you to post anything from the inauthentic accounts. It spreads throughout the system to the point that it really cant be policed even if facebook or twitter or google do a good job, so one thing is from extremism and disinformation, all things across what is the standard for policing and then the other thing is having Rapid Responses to deal with this stuff. As much as defense of this and the best way, any term of response allows the conspiracy to grow so the quicker you get out on it, the Mainstream Media will help. Other politicians and other elected officials can help you do that. Professor, what would you suggest the Political Parties and candidates do . They should have policies about this and a commitment not to use them with social Media Companies. A candidate can say i wasnt doing or saying that at that particular time coming as a sort of media entree for the folks at the moderation whoever is on facebook or twitter have the Rapid Response teams. How do we begin to tackle the dividend tax . May be the record of committing can deny the truth by claiming this place weve gotten some play for the dividend which we conceived in our california and what most worries us is in an environment of pervasive deep deepfake its not believe their eyes and ears tha but they can e on that there isnt that genuine saying thats not me. Its not that they should educate people. The response is do we give up . Do we stop educating it and the response is absolutely not. It must be a robust part of the learning curve to say look, we know wrongdoers are going to seize us and the phenomena to escape reality and we cant let them do that either. So, we have to get in the middle from completely believing everything our eyes and ears tell us to being skeptical without being a nihilistic because we have a marketplace of ideas that is functioning, but when what we are saying is not what we are saying we dont want to get into that space where we have a non functioning market space of ideas. Its been a helpful panel although i have to say that in a little bit concerned its a challenge we have before us sitting on the committee im often asked in conversations and casual discussions where do i thinwith who ithink is the great facing the world and i said without thinking i nearly blurted out and said no one knows what is real anymore and as i was driving home that evening i started thinking and i realized its true i think that is the greatest threat facing the nation where people dont accept basic truths and falsehoods any longer partly because of their own interest or because they just dont understand what is true and its not just a deepfake by the way. It determined we have all become very familiar with the manipulation is a syndicated we cant discuss here but the manipulation of intelligence products is extraordinarily troubling to me. And we live in a world where black is white and white is black and i could show you evidence that white is black and a lot of people would believe me that white is black. I think for us to lose that and by the way, i think we can control government and to a certain extent legitimate businesses that we cant control everyone. And this is going to be so pervasive and available to virtually anyone can create this and its easy to control the government and say you cant use it for political manipulations or whatever it might be that you can control the other 6 billion people on the earth and that is my concern, just the pure volu volume. Last thing and then i will get to my questions, it goes both ways. We can create the impression a lie is real but also that Something Real is a line to use your examples such politicians do much worse things so lets go with that example. He would then say its just deep fake so you lose the credibility in both ways which now brings me to my question. I will ask both and get you to respond with the potential should they be opensource and if the answer is no weve got to do that right now we cant wait for two or three years because theyve already be pervasive throughout the world. The second question and this is almost rhetorical but i would love your answers and thoughts how do we prepare people to live in a world of deception come in a world where they just generally may not know whats real or not. Anyone who would jump on those, should the algorithms be controlled . I will address the first one we need the decision to make the Metaphor Program open. You will see a weekend off from now we need to get this into the hands of the users there are companies out there that are starting to take these type of things so i think that these type of things need to be opensource. Is that the essence of your response . People need to be able to use it to educate the community and educate people and give people the tools so they can make the choices for themselves. The first part of the answer is did they get it anyway. What about suggestions on how we prepare people to live in a world where im sure youve thought through that and we have ten seconds to answer. He was a cynic. He wasnt suggesting that and he worried about humanity, both abroa, but thebroad endeavor Ise Foundation of democracy is that we have a set of truths for the meaningful policy we cant give up on the process. That is our hope the foundation of accepted truth is very shaky at this moment thank you, chairman. In the ear of the prevailing distrust of the media do they risk aggravating this kind of distrust . In bloomberg and businessweek bespeak from a very severe undercovered threat. This makes it trivial to do that they were not being factually accurate. The media is going to sit on real evidence for the fear that its a fake so weve already seen the stains with media organizations and now weve got to be aware of those that are tough to debunk without some leg work with journalistic effort. So the corrosive effort that we call trust decay affects not only politicians that everything and so journalism and the media they will either believe everything or they wil will bele nothing at all. If they believe nothing at all if we stoop longterm apathy and that is destructive for the United States. You could look to russia as an example of how the russian government has used a fire hose as a false approach that if you cancant believe in anything yu jusjust get up and surrender. The consequences are political participation, longterm apathy, disappointment and the officials that anything can be achieved, not wanting to show up and do anything like register for the draft or show up at all volunteers. That is one i would look it over the next ten to 15 years. That is a longterm effect and if you look at a longterm doctrine that is what they are after. They are just muc were just muct than we are and waiting for it to come to fruition for the journalists or media organizations or Fact Checkers before reporting on it like the chairman and how can you verify those things as journalists . Its important to help the tools out there for them. We are not the case now we have one Point Solutions we dont have a general solution, a gatekeeper that can be automated completely. This is a cat and mouse game as things get better to deceives visually they are covering up the evidence that they can be put in the hands and should be. We have situation where somebody comes up to them with a cell phone and shows them an atrocity they need those tools you have a media outlet its not just journalists the public. To eliminate all rebuttals that could have a very sick and backlash we are stating Fact Checking is expensive and time intensive and phone number who are doing well in economic terms is sort of dwindling over time and if we were to go down this path we need to find a way to fund back because they offer a solution they will not adopt this stuff with a few small trusted institutions. To remain a news source when you have to pay to fact check constantly. Thank you mr. Chairman. Weve come a long way. In the time that weve been here i pulled up a video recently posted with an Israeli Company if i get the name right i dont know if you are familiar they created a video saying among other things he could control the future, and they posted that on facebook specifically to challenge facebook and then he responded that hes not going to take that down. I wonder if you can comment on that whether you think that this is about and is it a wise decision i will start with you, professor. That is a perfect example within the context that its satire and parody. If it is really helpful for the conversation. And there are all of these questions are hard. Of course the default presumption we want to keep the government out of the strikes when it comes to ideas in the marketplace, but private companies can make those kind of choices and they have an incredible amount of power with no liability, and i think they made the right choice to keep up with those. It was a conversation of that essentially, that with nancy pelosi it seemed to be a conversation about the choices that they made and what does that mean for the society, so it was incredibly productive i think because of the qualitative nature they become more humorous overtime being any created they were trying to duplicate that. Part of the video spread for one purpose only which is to challenge the pool to discuss because he surely wouldnt want to show appear to testify or anywhere else or being a quagmire whenever that spikes thats the assessment needs to come in terms of the triage i would ask where it comes from and its putting out sources for entertainment that didnt really happen. We need to help the consumer make a better decision around about i like that they are being consistent in terms of their enforcement and im also not going to say that they should never change what the terms are. I think they are looking to hear at capitol hill to figure out what is it that we want to be policed and what do we want europe, what does europe want to be policed by things that they would like to hear from the legislators with falls in those parameters. One thing i like that they are doing is an authentic account creation and inauthentic. They are voicin voicing that and theyve increased it and i think that is good in terms of how they scale that up. Its not perfect, but its better. Is there a particular company or region or nation that is especially adept at this technology that is developing at a quicker rate or whatever . It is along the lines that you would expect this will be available off the shelf to be able to access it. Thats one of the big differences and i used to have to go out and buy photoshop or have some of the best competitors. Now High School Students with their good computer and if they are a gamer they already have a good gpu they can Download Data and train this type of thing overnight. With software that open and freely available, so its not something that you have to be an expert to run. A novelist caan artist can run f things. Thank you. I yield back. Following up on those points, the theme here getting easier to do, the quality of getting better, harder to detect and into examples we talk about as victims, democracy, elected officials, corporations with affordable attack on a journalist. But what about a Small Business with limited resources, what about individuals who are victims of the example you gave and you talked about the scale and widespread authentication. With capabilities might exist as we go forward in social media platforms, all enforcement or for individuals themselves to deal with the fiction issue . So the individual can make those decisions. The problem, a lot of technologies exist in the labs, research and different organizations, they are not shared and not implemented at scale. If i want to go out and test a picture it was very interesting picture before a tornado up in maryland a couple weeks ago looked surreal. I immediately thought that mustve been somewhere else, somewhere in the midwest use ago. So i did a search, reverse image search the could do and after doing research i found it was real and in my backyard. But not everybody has those types of capabilities. Not everybody thanks to do that everything. I know that i have relatives that just did this and they see something and they want to share. So i think the education piece and getting these tools as scale is what we need to work towards. The key is even with detection for the everyday person who has a video in the Google Search of the name prominently featured in a platform that refuses to take it down is a cb. Even with meeting the part of everyones is about them it is incredibly destructive and the same is probably true for Small Business. They cannot afford reputation. Com if there is something that cast on their business model. They need to not be able to have it removed even though it is false in impersonation and even a definition we know that the law works really slowly and presuming they can find who the creators. Were in this liminal. , it may last years. Where individuals will suffer and its incredibly hard to talk to victims because are so little that i can force anyone to do and we will see a lot of suffering. The issues that we just talked about, are you trying to tackle those with your model walls that youre talking about . I am the Vice President of the Civil Rights Initiative and we have been working with lawmakers around the country at the state level and the federal level, both in terms of pornography and now think about how really carefully and narrowly cracked a law that would be end many fracture videos that are impersonation amount of criminal defamation. I think we have work ahead of us. It can be tackled but it will have a modest impact. When youre doing this are you talking to local and state Law Enforcement agencies . Yes. In my work on cyber stalking, it was a phenomenon cyber stalking and how hard it is to teach local Law Enforcement about the technology and the laws themselves in the street crimes. But when you talk to them about online crimes even though their offline components, they say i dont know where to begin. I dont know if i get a warrant from the Service Provider to get the ip address to go to the isp. We have education, and he called for funding and training of local Law Enforcement on the question of cyber stalking. I would love to see that in regard to cyber stalking and threats but more broadly. Thank you all. Mr. Hurd. Thank you, chairman. Im going to try to something that is impossible in the next five minutes. Touch on and get your perspective on four areas. The ability to detect, weve touched on this authentication, how do we handle, how do we develop a strategy to near National Security to counter this information and who should be doing that. In my first question can you could talk to us about the ability to attack the forensics, is their ability to do a pixel by pixel analysis, provide the analysis . Other other areas of basic research we should be focusing on in order for us to help with inability to protect . The approach that is being taken in the community is one of a comprehensive view. There are pixel types of applications, not necessarily pixel by pixel but the metadata that you get on an image and you know that the algorithms that were there and you know there is resident residual information left if you take an image and modify and recompress it. With a digital level that is where majority of the work is being done. How easy is that now and who should potentially be doing that . The government is putting a lot of money into this. Theres a lot more manipulators than there are detectors. So i would hope that behind closed doors that the social media sites in the youtubes of the world are looking into this type of application. Is the ability to understand the various metadata or perking that that we can do expiration, is that going to help us we can do real authentication . Anytime you put a video for a picture there is a green checkmark. Personally i dont think you need to worry about authentication because as we know everything that goes up online is modified in some way whether its cropped or colored instagram distribution, we like to use the things of the modified but its the scale. If there is a modification of intent if you put a floor in a picture next to someone that has a very different effect if you replace and basically in a picture. This discussion that the attribution piece and the actual report that says this is exactly what was done is a big part of the medical program as well. The closes youre going to get is to say all these things happen to his image and therefore the user would have to be the one to make the decisions on whether discoverable or not. If youre taking an image in your the fbi and going to court, even if you did change one pixel you lose credibility. But if youre doing an fbi investigation give a very compressed grainy Surveillance Video and is the my give you information if you believe it. The responsibility of the Central Intelligence agency. Because the National Security act of 47 cannot do accounts in the United States of america. Very hard to do in english. How should we be looking out i Government Strategy to deal with this information especially in the context of National Security . Somebody else more appropriate to serve . I think its two parts, i would encourage the social Media Industry and the platforms to focus on methods. Who is doing the forgeries, congregational propaganda, can we have a list of those we know who the people are that are building the equipment, the essentially the weapons being used. I would encourage the government to focus on actors. This is in the case of the cia overseas, dhs in terms of protecting the homeland. The state department which is used as a u. S. Information agency would be out there outing and for brightly going after the actors doing the manipulation. I still feel like we really slowed to do this. To the only ones i can figure it out. When i worked with the social media team we spotted actors that we believed were doing. The more rapidly the government can do that, the more the public and help, social Media Companies know what to take down because attribution really only comes ue only ones with the tools to do that. Thank you i yield back thank you, mr. Chairman. First of all, i want to make sure the anderson correctly if something happened to the reporter in india and happen in america did i understand that that would not constitute a crime per se . It might be understood as cyber stalking. Which is a crime under most state laws. The problem is it was like death by a thousand cuts. To prostitute cyber stalking you needed course of conduct, persistent repetition of the same person. If it were the first time,. Coming together, one person puts up the photo, the screenshot, another person. The home address. Yet another person. Im available. With the screenshot. The person who originated it under current law would likely not be a subject to criminal prosecution . Right. Did i understand you to say that even if it were it would have modest impact . What i said was if we had criminal laws that combated the phenomenon in taylor to impersonations that create harm, this law is really important. Its not just in the overall impact. We need a partnership,. I want to move on but i also cannot help but have this terrible of aunties inferno abandoned or you enter here, whose job should be to label, that was not clear and i thought it might be the media platform company. I think it would be the creator that we could, not just as the Campaign Finance space where we say there are certain Disclosure Rules and we say if its a political and you have to own it. s will for an originator, how is it that we have any jurisdictional reach. We dont. There are no boundaries right. If its transmitted to a foreign person and retransmitted we have no means of enforcement so labeling of itself. Without the dante inferno . We have social media platforms, they are responsibly they may and if indeed im pretty skeptical whether well get there with the technology of detection. But assuming that its possible that a reasonable tactic could be disclosure saying this is a fake this is what you will. We actually have, as it were a comparable truth Verification Mechanism currently. And yet, a member of my family who shall go unnamed, immediate family, once posted how our judicial was an unconstitutional should be augmented because members of congress can retire after one term and collect full tension and benefits and have healthcare free for life and their children go to college for free. Not one letter of the search industry. Which couldve been verified if they are gone to snopes, they did not. And even if they did in the political context the truth is the person perpetuating that may have a political agenda such as the parallel fashion and attacks against the reliability of snopes. I dont have much time left but im interested in him getting a thought political speech and First Amendment, you mentioned were protected against being impersonated. Its not clear how we square case all which is created a very high barrier. The United States is made clear, United States versus alvarez, we protect also. We will ensure it enjoys first member protection, because Justice Kennedy explained that has us engaged encounter speeches that read connects citizenship. There are times of the equipment clear that once also creates harm that we can and should regulate. When that includes definition even Public Officials have said that you know youre reckless. So the true threats incitement, we can regulate certain words and images is one of the categories. Yes it is protected speech but itself also. But falsehood that causes harm, the court has said that is a space of regulation. Thank you. Mr. Welch. Thank you very much. This is very helpful. There are different categories and were all trendy arms around them theres a question of the First Amendment which they were talking about when theres a question of foreign interference. And theres a question of economic harm reputational harm. The environment were learning as we go. But ive heard you describe the whole world of publishing is upside down. It does not exist like it did prior to the internet. So the question is, whether we want to get back to the principles apply presocial media. It is not like the principles necessarily have to be abandoned, there to be applied. They would apply in different ways for each of those categories. I just want to ask each of you. Whether we should get back to the requirement of an editorial function in a reasonable standard of care by treating the platforms as publishers. Andrew said yes, and id be interested for the others to see, yes or no. Working with a number of people in this area i think this horse has left the gate. I dont think well be able to get back to that type. What about statutory change that she is proposing . Who has a duty. May be clear, it wasnt i was suggesting that social media platforms be understood as publishers. Strict reliable, but rather that we condition their immunity unreasonable practices, those reasonable practices may be the ones they use right now. I will disagree about calling them publishers for strict reliable definition. Thats what im suggesting at all. Thank you for the clarification. It seems to be one phenomena question that we would have to ask. It would be a legislative action. Mr. Clark . I think you have an issue where people online going talk and composed very quickly to obey ruleobey rules. I think the habit of the entire culture has changed. What about on the question of somebody going online and putting up a fake video that destroys an iphone. Who has a duty of care with respect to allowing that to be stated on their part from . Nobody has a . I think we cant authenticate contacting users. You can make it comparable for certain types of contacts that they pose. Who would be liable in the case of the false statement about an idea that destroyed his life . I will defer to the lawyer. The creator of the deep sake. As long as he suggested, the platform had reasonable practices affectation and ex post moderation practices. Does a platform under current law have any duty. No liability under section 230. That seems like a merger question, what are the other issues that is been debated, is of different point of view between republicans and democrats and bias in what goes on in the platform. They would have to be some standard that wasnt seen as the plainfield for republicans or democrat. Is that possible to do . Was that something that was true presocial media in the days i was going to safer standards we cannot actually use technology a bit here to create technological standards for making adjustment and not fake. That might take the political aspect if you have open centers primarily in the companys training on. Thank you all very much my time is up. I yield back. Thank you. Next step means thank you so much mr. Chairman and the key to all of you for being here. This conversation has been pretty disturbing and actually quite scary when i think about it the internet is a new weapon of choice. As i listen to the testimony and questions, as we think about an individual who goes out in valleys laws of creates harm would be held accountable. I believe any individual or entity that believes or creates harm or Public Safety becomes a big Public Safety risk. In the entity that creates an even for those things to happen should be held accountable as well. You know when i think about those around the world who are not our allies. They want to create chaos in this country. What a wonderful way, and easy way to be able to do that. The problem is the fake information is a problem. But the other problem is it creates an environment where good people no longer believe the good guys. And boy are we seeing the and our country. That is a major problem, the institutions that we have grown to depend on and believing are no longer believe. That could create total chaos. Back to his statement about epic video is being created in america the transmitted to another country. Could that be the act of transmitting, simple act of transmitting the video be the validation. Another is been a lot of discussion with no boundaries, how to hold somebody in a foreign land accountable but id love to hear thoughts. There are two pieces to that, the procedural jurisdictional question of whether its constitutional to haul them into your court and then theres the expedition question which are rely on mr. Wass for that. If youre in america and you transmit video that creates a Public Safety concern or National Security risk from america be the validation. Its directed at the United States or in the United States and direct the outside and you transmit from. Thats a different question than i thought youre asking. Under the 14th amend how we think about personal jurisdiction, if your immune activity to another state and purposely we can haul you into court. The question is when its an american arresting her productivity abroad i would imagine hi its contingent mr. Restaurant taken from the quick. Im not a lawyer and i tried to avoid them but i would say theres no specific provision around transmitting the abroad. It comes down to whatever country affected every bricks or loss in the relationship with the United States. Im not sure if its ever been executed. It is something that needs to be addressed because what is been clear over the last four years exertional physical boundary in the communities whom are often times the smartest minute providers, russia, china, around, they actually look to enlist people and make the contact look more frantic and setting people up. Sometimes there where and sometimes not in those aware are doing it willingly. If you look at the leaks which was another hacking attempt trying to drag an election it was 70 north america that awarded the world to it. I think we need to figure out the relationships and how we would handle it in terms of the all our own Law Enforcement. Thank you. We talked about the Intelligence Community and the National Security entity. You talked a little bit about, how should we test the Intelligence Community interNational Security entity with assessing and forecasting future impact of technology. I think theres two part, one the purveyors and actors that are going to use it. Its pretty straight forward from outside from where i work. I think the part missing from the government perspective was where the technology being developed, the number one place i would have under the u. S. Government is tel aviv, this is from the central from cyber tools to abutment tools to implement operation. Both good and bad depending on the perspective. When i talked to the government about top there really wellinformed about what deep nationstate actors are doing but missing with the private sector is openly available of fbi and other tools out there. Quickly to his point, it is worth repeating. The fundamental techniques and tools publish online and we compile metrics of rates of improvement so i agree what he said but it is easy to go and discover this information for cells. Thank you. I yield back. Doctor windstream. Thank you, mr. Chairman and thank you for addressing the question that we ran out of time on the extradition loss. I appreciate have an opportunity and getting to other punitive measures that we may be able to Start Talking about and think about and with the extradition loss we might end up with a lot of people hanging out in other peoples embassies for many years. Rather than being extradited. At the same time i dont find myself eager to engage with trial lawyers. That is probably where we need to head with us. Located punitive measures certainly monitor would be included because people end up as we pointed out with huge monetary losses because of the fake stories. And what about prison time . We really need to consider being tough on this. If its to be effective for. One thing i would add that i ran out of time and open question was about sanctions. If you look at the gr you indictment in particular which is july of 18. There being sanctioned out of it and so the companies out of the february indictment. Thats effective but you can move down the chain of command such that hackers and influencers and propaganda student want to be hired at the firms because they know the risks that they can be individually synced in. It seems like it would be hard to execute but once we got good at it i think it would be a great facet if you could turn down the implement to were the best hackers in the best propaganda student want to work the authoritarian regime it changed the nature of things. We could look at those pushing up tools in terms of cyber and hacking tools that are being used for malicious purposes. You could go after those companies which often times international. Theyre not necessarily tied to a nation and that would also send a downward pressure across the Information Space and also send a more undercover and places like the dark web, thats okay because that plays into our strength. We have great intelligence abilities at the end in real good sophisticated intelligence agencies. Now we would know where it is. But it would be a black market. It changes the problem to our bandage. The other thing, mention sanctions, that does make a lot of sense especially if its a country that theres no way youre going to get some type of extradition agreement. Its proliferated because we have not responded. Thank you. I yield back in case anyone else wants to respond. I have a few questions can you talk a little bit about im sorry. Mr. Castro. I enjoyed your article and had a chance to visit a few months back there is hate speech and fighting words that are not as political speech and making the determination we had to find out the value of the type of speech or expression so let me ask you what is the value of a fake . To add to that is the value to the list when we think about free speech. As the value to the autonomy rights to the speaker. The value could be profound. It could be that deepfake contributes to art. In the sta star wars we had care fisher. There is a lot of value in deepfake. I recognize with my co panelists are suggesting. We do have guides in the law about falsehoods impersonations whether its another kind of speech where we say fraud. They may go down the road where certain speech like heat of speech isnt protected the same as political or even ordinary all of this is so contexcontext will i dont thine could have a onesizefitsall rule even as to impersonations weve got to bring context to the floor let me follow up i want to ask you all one of the challenges we had with the russian interfere in particularly what they put on facebook it seemed as though the social Media Companies were unprepared for that and there was no infrastructure for moderating those things. There is a creator that uses software who then posts on social media and then the traditional media picks it up and further proliferates it into the American Society so where do we construct that infrastructure from vetting and moderating . Putting something up thats innocent than it gets used by someone else for a different message. It gets out there and is twisted in a certain way down the line. Sometimes the onion articles are actually satire. That is a good example. We need these type of thing how it progress in its to use as much content that suits their narrative that is a pretty standard disinformation approach and false content that means it is more favorable for adversaries to repurpose which is the scenario david talked about so i think the social Media Companies need to work into the severity of impac the t we know that some of those are making a fake video about Electoral Systems being built or broken down on election day 2020. I want to ask a few followup question. I dont know if any of you know to date how many view as it has received that i wonder if you have faith in that there are x. Million and of those how many will learn that it was fake and how many will be permanently misled and furthermore if you can comment on the phenomenon even if youve are later persuaded what you have seen of the person isnt true, psychologists tell you you never lose the lingering negative impression of the person so i wonder if you can comment on those two issues. They tend not to travel so we would expect to hold the same. It is a fake no matter how good you or the press do putting that out there because the truth in this case about what youve seen its faults is not going to be as visually impacting and seeing the video . If you care, you care about clarifications and fact check if you are enjoying the media you enjoy the media so the speaker you enjoy or experience. I dont know i if it is journalism or what the plug should teachers and schools be educating about you can believe what you see. This gets to the wires dividend in politics there is a saying at first time you hear an expression you make personal attribution and the second time you say somebody once said third time its personally yours. For the dividend is now out there but how do we educate young people or not so young people about how to proceed media now without distrusting everything in which there is this lawyers dividend. The more we are seeing even if it is false conference the worldview. Social psychology studies show that we are just going to ignore it so that we will believe a lie if it confirmed its confirmation by its theory so you are right it becomes incredibly hard to be debunked to caus the closet cone worldview. Its tough. That is the task as parents, educators, teachers ten years ago remember the Critical Thinking was how do we teach students how to do a Google Search and ca came baby leave everything in this prominent search in whatever they are ande doing and we saw you did a search for the term. Teachers struggle to explain just because its prominent doesnt mean its real and i think that we will have the same struggle today weve got to teach them about the phenomenon to escape. We have a white house that is popularized to describe lots of things that are real and some in the country there there is alrn environment in which there is licensed to call things faith that are credible and it seems that is a pretty Fertile Ground for information that is truly fake. To find other words for it, false, fraudulent because its been debased as a term people dont know what you mean by it. Its worth noting when President Trump referred weve already seen the dividend has been from the bully pulpit so i think we have a problem on our. Do you think theres optimism for tools where weve gone and checked. Ahead of time they would have had access to it and they wouldnt have had to go search for it. Particularly russia dividing us by pushing out a fake video of Police Violence on people of color but you could certainly push out videos that are enormously jarring and disruptive introducing a video of that negative impression you cant unwind the consequences of what happens in the community its hard to measure thats not happening because of the low barriers to trade and there will be such easy deniability. If i could add there is good news that the socia but the soce watch face books newsroom they are taking down so theyve spreaspread to take us back thap precipitously. We have the curriculum for evaluating sources and the government i was trained on it at the fbi academy they have the Central Intelligence agency which is how to influence Information Knowledge and expertise they teach this as an unclassified sort of course but its how you adapt back into the online space. Its not young people in social media. Its the older generation has come to this Technology Late that doesnt understand they understand the way newspapers are produced where the outlet is coming in who the authors are. I was with a group of students how do we help older generations new to social media or with less experience evaluating the sources you can send them tips do you know where it is physically located at and who the author is. Its not just for the young People Places that are known for extremism and three package for different audiences in the United States. Is the Technology Already at this stage where it can produce a video in other words whether the video is authentic. There are examples out there that if taken out of context if they are sent out there and theres a story or message with it that people will believe it and its not just people that have got a. There is a video out there that showed a plane flying upside down, very realistic looking and i think what people need to do is get confirmation from other sources that some thing really happened so a video in isolation. But if thats what youre talking about independent of whether it passes the test so to speak, yes that is the type of technology thats out there. It will always be possible to disprove the audio by disproving the circumstances around it in other words, if there were audio on the phone i dont know if i were in this place at this time or if there is a video it will always be possible to show she was somewhere else at the time. Do you see the Technology Getting to the point where in the absence of the ability to prove externally the video where the audio is fake that the algorithms that help produce the content would be so good that the best you will be able to do is the computer and analysis that will give you a percentage and the likelihood that this is a forgery 75 that you will never be able to get to 200 , are we headed to that day where it wont be possible to show something we have seen or heard is a legitimate . It was exactly that, coming up with a quantitative scale of manipulation or deception i dont know if theyve gotten there and left partway through but there is going to be a point where we can throw everything they have at this, at these type of techniques and theres still a question about whether its authentic or not we can do close analysis for tools and voice verification but like the court of law one side saying the other thing and there will be cases where there is nothing definitive. On that optimistic note we will conclude and my thanks for your testimony and recommendations. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]