What Happens When We Can’t Trust What We See?James sits in a cold, dark cell, the walls a dull grey. He wonders how they can possibly believe that he’s the culprit. He’s never harmed so much as a fly, and would absolutely never lay a finger on another person. He didn’t do this.The detective walks in. He’s a burly man, twice the size of James. He’s holding a tablet. He places it down so James can see the screen, and then takes a seat opposite.‘So, you didn’t kill your neighbour?’ the detective asks. Straight to the point.‘No!’ James cries.‘Take a look at this.’The detective presses play and the tablet bursts into life. At first, James can’t make out what he’s seeing. Then he realises. It’s his neighbour’s front door. A man approaches and rings the doorbell. He’s holding a gun in his hands. James watches intently. The detective focuses on James’s reaction. The neighbour opens the door and BANG. The gunshot makes James recoil, away from the screen.‘Keep watching,’ the detective insists.James watches as the gunman, the killer, turns to face the CCTV camera. James is stunned. He recognises the killer.‘B- but that’s…’‘Yes,’ the detective interrupts, ‘that’s you.’James doesn’t understand. He knows for a fact he wasn’t there but this video would suggest otherwise. The video has paused. James studies the man, the man with his face. Too detailed to be a mask, too exact to be a lookalike. For a brief moment James considers the idea that he has a long-lost twin.James studies the man, the man with his face. Too detailed to be a mask, too exact to be a lookalike. For a brief moment James considers the idea that he has a long-lost twin.‘I’ll see you in court,’ the detective says, standing up and grabbing the tablet.The detective leaves, slamming the door behind him. James buries his head in his hands and begins to sob.It sounds like an episode of Black Mirror. An innocent man discovers his face was caught on camera at the scene of the crime. Even the best lawyer in the world would have a hard time convincing the jury of James’s innocence. After all, visual evidence is a powerful asset for the prosecution. Eyewitnesses can make mistakes in the heat of the moment and their testimony is far from reliable. Video footage, however, is unmistakable. With video, what you see is what you get. James’s story is fictional, or at least, it is for now. Yet recent developments in technology and artificial intelligence threaten to turn this sci-fi thriller into reality.The idea for this story popped into my head after hearing of a breakthrough in artificial intelligence. Like most technological breakthroughs, this one centred on a use case far from useful. And like most viral posts on Reddit — where I first encountered the story — it concerned renowned actor and internet sweetheart Nicolas Cage.A subreddit called r/deepfakes has rapidly grown in popularity. A cursory glance at the most popular posts reveals videos of celebrities performing sexual acts. Only, it isn’t really them. Using neural networks and a simple application, people are able to take a video of a porn star and replace their face with whoever takes their fancy.The technology is only going to improve and be refined further. Until one day, a faked video would look just like the real thing.Hence, you see videos of Daisy Ridley, Scarlett Johansson, and Emma Watson — or at least, their faces — in compromising positions. Or, in the momentary lapses, the odd post that isn’t porn, you see Nicolas Cage starring in films like Titanic, James Bond, or Raiders of the Lost Ark. For now, your choice is simple: porn or Cage.It’s a little disconcerting to watch. You know that it’s not real, yet you can’t help but be convinced. The quality is often astonishingly realistic, with the celebrity’s face matched perfectly to the porn star’s body. And, let’s face it, the technology is only going to improve and be refined further. Until one day, a faked video would look just like the real thing.I wonder where this technology might lead?In my short story, James is in a lot of trouble. Somebody has framed him for murder. In the past, this would involve planting evidence, like the murder weapon, in his house. A clever criminal might even steal a piece of clothing from the ‘framee’ and plant it at the scene. Now, it would appear that all it takes is a couple of videos and some easily accessible artificial intelligence.Imagine a world where history can be rewritten, where evidence can be faked, where seeing is no longer believing.In the past, photographic evidence was infallible. Then, with the rise of Photoshop and other editing software, it became increasingly easy for any one of us to fake a scenario. Depending on the skill of the editor, a photoshopped image could be indistinguishable from reality. The ability to edit videos raises this to a whole new level. We’ve grown used to looking at photos with a pinch of salt, with a sceptical eye. Videos, so far, have proven a more accurate representation of society. If the infallibility of video is removed, what then?Imagine a world where history can be rewritten, where evidence can be faked, where seeing is no longer believing. James’s fate, it seems, may soon be more common than we think.NOTE: This piece was first published on my site here. If you like you can follow me on Twitter. Or not. It’s up to you.When Seeing Isn’t Believing was originally published in Hacker Noon on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.