SWIFT Tie Breaker Tuesday

It’s a SWIFT-Tie-Breaker Tuesday on Malicious Deep Fakes

Our editors and AI have made a concerted effort to predict which roles are for or against making malicious, deep fake images illegal. It’s Tiebreaker Tuesday when we predict the toughest-to-call roles on the PolicyKeys gameboard. (5 Minute Read)

The SWIFT Act

Safeguarding Web Integrity and Fight Trickery with the SWIFT Act: The problem is malicious deep fakes spread misinformation, erode public trust, violate privacy, and risk national security. You can read the introduction to this week’s puzzle in the Monday Puzzle Drop article.

Puzzle, Pre-Score, AI, Edit, AI, Score

The puzzle sets the stage for a balanced narrative about a solution. The editors pre-score 56 of the 128 roles based on loose ties to behaviors, attitudes, values, and ethics. Then, POLI’s (Political Omnibus Leadership Initiative) “Birds of a Feather” AI calls all the roles as having a bias towards change, status quo, or a draw.

Then POLI double checks the calls for close ties to other roles, with the SAT9 Filter, essentially 256 deadlocked ‘supreme courts’ with each role the ‘chief justice’ in a 5-4 and 4-5 bench. This gives the solution an error margin for the nonpartisan score.

The following are the roles that were either tied or the editors overturned POLI’s general call for a specific reason.

Should Malicious
Deep Fakes Be Illegal?

YES

Local Builders (17) worry about potential harm to their personal and professional reputations.

Multi/National Corporations (31) are vested in preventing commercial product sabotage from malicious deep fakes.

Durable Manufacturers (31) want to safeguard the integrity of their products and the interests of their consumers.

Food Chain Stakeholders (31) believe that false information about their products could spread panic among consumers and harm their business.

Utilities’ (31) top priority is the safety of its customers, workers, and customers, and malicious deep fakes are the opposite of safety.

NO

Republican Leadership (2) advises caution against rapid legislation, preferring self-regulation and technological solutions.

Hawk Republicans (4) view deep fakes as potential strategic assets, cautioning against legislation that limits their utility.

Energy States (4) contend that deep fakes could be a strategic international relations and defense tool.

Corporate Lobbyists (8) favor a balanced approach, protecting deep fakes’ artistic potential while preventing misuse.

Liberty Republicans (8) prioritize free speech, advocating for self-restraint and teaching how to spot deep fakes.

Governors (8) recommend balanced deep fake legislation to protect political expression and privacy.

Founders (8), express concerns that deep fake legislation could impede technological innovation promoting a nuanced approach to deep fake regulation.

Taker States (8) argue against over-regulation in general and specifically free speech.

HMOs / Health Maintenance Organizations (10) always shy away from regulation, not only for themselves but for others.

Billionaires (10) see an opportunity for technology to solve the deep fake problem and prefer government stay out of it.

Private Equity (10) sees more laws as a way to limit productivity and profit.

National Lenders (12) see more pragmatic approaches over legislation to manage the persistence of deep fakes.

Big Agriculture (12) worries that legislation could turn into a game of “whack-a-mole,” in which efforts to suppress deep fakes lead to more popping up elsewhere.

The Real Estate sector (18) may be wary that deep fake legislation might lead to unnecessary panic, causing a metaphorical mountain out of a molehill situation.

Core Republicans (20) argue that legislation against deep fakes could result in costly enforcement measures.

Border and Order Republicans (20) see deep fakes as a way to protect America’s interests and borders.

E-Platforms (22) argue that the sheer volume of content uploaded to their platforms makes monitoring and enforcing regulations against deep fakes near impossible.

C-Suite Executives (24) propose a measured approach that balances harm prevention with technological progress.

Government Unions (28) share the concern that legislation against deep fakes could end up penalizing young pranksters disproportionately.

Social Media (30) platforms express concern that making deep fakes illegal could be considered censorship.

Party Favor Republicans (30) voice concerns that legislation against deep fakes might suppress vibrant political discourse.

The Free Press (30) is concerned that deep fakes while misleading, can also stimulate vigorous political discussion and debates that can then be reported on.

Rural Investors (32) express concerns that regulating deep fakes represents a form of censorship, potentially the first step down a slippery slope of further restrictions.

Nonpartisan
Score

POLI the AI, gave this solution a VAST SUPERMAJORITY rating of 79% ±2 IN FAVOR, and our editors agreed. We predict MAKING MALICIOUS DEEP FAKE VIDEOS ILLEGAL will get support from a majority of each of the four sides of the political table, making the SWIFT Act a US Public Policy Leaderboard-worthy solution (US-PPL). How accurate are these scores? Only polling will tell.

90% and up Near Unanimous
80% – 89% Near Consensus
75% -79% VAST SUPERMAJORITY
67% – 74% Strong Supermajority
60% – 66% Supermajority
50% – 59% Majority

By Contrast

SCOTUS’s approval rating is 41%,
the media is 32%, and
Congress is 15%.

Do we expect you to agree with the supermajority on all the rankings? 

Of course not; you’re human, not a hyper-partisan parrot.

We think you’ll agree with the leaderboard about 3 out of 4 items on average. Why?

The average score of the policies on the PolicyKeys™ US Public Policy Leaderboard (US-PPL) Sweet Sixteen is 76%, with many above 80%Politics 4.0 is already a 2x to 5x better model of US political sentiment and direction than politics as usual.

Fly
Higher

New York Deep Fake Pornography Bill
NBC4 New York

Campaigns Could Take Deep Fakes To Another New Level
Boston Globe

H.R.5586 – Deep Fakes Accountability Act
Congress.gov

Deepfake Laws Risk Creating More Problems Than They Solve
CATO.org

Deep Fakes and International Policy
Brookings

Deepfakes, Elections, and Shrinking the Liar’s Dividend
Brennan Center For Justice

Madam Secretary, Season 6, Episode 6, Deepfake
Netflix

Defending Against Deep Fakes Through Technological Detection, Media Literacy, and Laws and Regulations
International Affairs Review

METHODOLOGY

Where can we Agree?
Finding out takes guts from all four sides of the political table.
[::]


Posted

in

by