[snowwrestler]

No, no, that's not what he's saying. He's saying that in court, proving the provenance of a piece of physical evidence is more important than the technical factors of the thing itself. But what everyone is focused on with deep fake videos, is how technically good they are.

My daughter's birth certificate could be reproduced 100% indistinguishably by a Fedex Office print shop. But it is backed up by a chain of people who, if necessary, will testify that it is authentic.

People think that testimony requires physical evidence to back it up (look at the reaction to Dr. Ford's accusations). But the legal reality is the opposite... physical evidence is only useful at trial to the extent that credible testimony can establish its authenticity and relevance.

So a deep fake video that looks exactly like a real video will only be useful at trial if it can be established as credible, by the testimony of credible witnesses.

All that said... there is more to life than the justice system. Forgeries have always taken in the gullible, so deep fakes will undoubtedly have a social impact, especially in the early days before the public is generally aware of the capabilities. This is undoubtedly one reason the press is starting to cover this technology so aggressively.