sure, totally ok to incorporate those video items & publish your (signed) story. i think we’ve seen pretty clesrly that people want to publish and be recognised for their publications. building a web of trust has to start somewhere. currently we’re in the “its all very difficult, we cant solve all the tricky things, so we’re not even trying” stage. hopefully we find a way to move forward, even if its not perfect.

i think the point is to be able to say “this video was released by X, and X signed it so they must have released it, and you can validate that yourself”. it means if you see a logo that shows CNN, and its signed by CNN, then you know for sure that CNN released it. As a news organisation they should have their own due diligence about sources etc, but they can at least be held to account at that point. versus random ai generated video with a fake logo and fake attribution that is going viral and not being able to be discredited in time before it becomes truth.

maybe? was just trying to provide specific alternatives with a concrete example

… so make the phones do it?

i mean, its not rocket surgery.

so try again? also: if a pixel changes then it isn’t the original source video, by definition. being able to determine that it has been altered is entirely the point.

videos need to be cryptographically signed and able to be verified. all news outlets should do this.

nope.

i have been using “rss2email” for years. extremely simple, works great, deterministic. no need to reinvent the wheel for a simple use case, and thats half the point here - a lot of “solutions” being found were already solved.