|
|
|
|
|
|
by drstewart
1779 days ago
|
|
|
>Really, I think this is doing a sort of trust arbitrage. The tech exists to fake personal videos now, but customers aren't widely aware of it. You can take advantage of that difference with stunts like this. In a few years, people will know this can easily be done and the value of personal videos will drop. At some point it'll be no different to the average customer than an email with "Hi <name here>!" or a letter with faux-handwriting on it. This was my exact thought as I read this article. The other part to this is that it comes at a societal cost: it will add another layer of distrust and cynicism in how we communicate, all at the expense of a short-term value to a handful of companies that race to maximize the value of this technology over the coming years. |
|
|
That said, I would argue that this specific practice will become more ethical over time (as the arbitrage opportunity disappears). Once customers are aware of the practice, the trust difference fades, and the deception goes away. 10 years from now, this practice will be equivalent to claiming "Famous Fishtoaster's has the best fish toast in the world": it's a lie, but one that all parties know is false so no one is being deceived. Just like no one really believes personalized text in an email implies that that email was handwritten anymore, no one will believe these videos are personalized and the problem goes away.
But yeah, it will be a societal cost: one less thing we can trust. Just like "photos don't lie" went out the window with widespread photoshopping, so will trust in personalized videos.