Speaker 1: The year is nineteen thirty four, the setting is Scotland.
Speaker 1: Startling photos have emerged, appearing to capture the Lochness Monster.
Speaker 1: Fast forward ninety years to twenty twenty four to an
Speaker 1: election campaign in Australia and a video is released of
Speaker 1: a prime minister promising to ban gambling.
Speaker 2: Ads on all forms of gambling advertising, digital and both.
Speaker 1: A fake designed specifically to deceive. And while humans have
Speaker 1: always had a tendency to mislead each other, what's new
Speaker 1: is the technology. It's now easier than ever to create
Speaker 1: highly realistic fake content and we're only just starting to
Speaker 1: see how wide ranging and insidious the impact will be.
Speaker 1: I'm Ruby Jones and you're listening to seven AM today
Speaker 1: Independent Senator David Pocock on his new bill to crack
Speaker 1: down on deep fakes and why he thinks the government
Speaker 1: has dropped them all on regulating AI. It's Wednesday, November
Speaker 1: twenty six. Senator Pocock, thank you so much for joining me.
Speaker 3: It would be great to be with you.
Speaker 1: So you've been in the public eye for a very
Speaker 1: long time now, and I wonder have you been aware
Speaker 1: of people making deep fakes about you?
Speaker 3: Not a deep fake?
Speaker 4: I when Back when I was playing professional rugby, there
Speaker 4: were a couple of scams where, you know, someone was
Speaker 4: just using a photo of me to flog off like
Speaker 4: protein powders or something, and it was harder than it
Speaker 4: should have been to try and get them taken down.
Speaker 4: I think they're on Facebook or you know, some social
Speaker 4: media site, but you know, that's just a photo. Now
Speaker 4: we're firmly in the era of AI and deep fakes,
Speaker 4: and yeah, that's just a whole other level.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I want to get into all of that. But
Speaker 1: I wonder when that was happening. I mean, it must
Speaker 1: have felt strange to see your image used in that way,
Speaker 1: and I mean, did you kind of have much recourse
Speaker 1: to stop it.
Speaker 4: I think my manager ended up helping contact the social
Speaker 4: media company and get it taken down. But you know,
Speaker 4: that was kind of just it. It was very very
Speaker 4: hard to do anything else, And yeah, it was. It
Speaker 4: didn't feel great having some company selling questionable, questionable products
Speaker 4: using your name. And you know, I think we're seeing
Speaker 4: this across the board. We know that scams are on
Speaker 4: the rise. People are getting far more sophisticated, and I
Speaker 4: really think that we need to be legislating against this
Speaker 4: sort of misuse of technology.
Speaker 1: Yeah, so, as you say, as AI has come into view,
Speaker 1: the scope of this has just exploded. And this week
Speaker 1: you introduced a bill into the Senate to crack down
Speaker 1: on deep fakes. So tell me what's in the bill.
Speaker 4: Well, my bill basically says that you own your face
Speaker 4: and you own your voice. Australians should own their likeness,
Speaker 4: that is part of them, and you should be able
Speaker 4: to deep fake someone's face or voice, create a video
Speaker 4: or an audio recording without their consent. And so it
Speaker 4: establishes a complaints process for the non consensual creation and
Speaker 4: then sharing of deep fake material, and it strengthens the
Speaker 4: Safety Commissioners powers to respond to our generated harm, to
Speaker 4: issue removal notices formal warnings to social media companies, and
Speaker 4: then actually sets up an avenue for civil redress through
Speaker 4: the courts if individually is wrongfully depicted or exploited. I
Speaker 4: guess that's probably going to be more used when there
Speaker 4: is some sort of commercial gain, and I think we
Speaker 4: really need that avenue.
Speaker 1: What about if someone unwittingly shared fake imagery?
Speaker 4: Very little you can do there, and then that is
Speaker 4: very clear in the bill you have to knowingly be
Speaker 4: sharing what is clearly a non consensual deep fake. It's
Speaker 4: very much focused at the creation of them and so
Speaker 4: being able to straw a bit of a lie I'm
Speaker 4: the sand and say like, this is not okay. We're
Speaker 4: entering this this very different world where you can now
Speaker 4: put a few prompts and a few images potentially some
Speaker 4: clips of someone speaking or video and generate their likeness
Speaker 4: and make them say anything. We've seen this happen already
Speaker 4: in scams with you know, I think some of the
Speaker 4: examples have been you know, Koshy and Dick Smith selling
Speaker 4: scam investment schemes. So this is happening, and this is
Speaker 4: really trying to get the Parliament to think more about
Speaker 4: this and actually put in our law that this is
Speaker 4: not okay and there's actually ways that Australians can combat it.
Speaker 1: And so tell me a bit more about I guess
Speaker 1: the problem that you're trying to fix here, because this
Speaker 1: idea that you know, we should own our own face,
Speaker 1: it seems obvious, it seems like common sense. But what
Speaker 1: is the current reality. What recourse to people have at
Speaker 1: the moment if a fake image or a fake video
Speaker 1: of them is shared without their knowledge or consent very little.
Speaker 4: I mean, you know, contact the Facebook complaints team, good luck,
Speaker 4: contact Instagram like there there is there is no sort
Speaker 4: of designated complaints pathway. And a big part of this
Speaker 4: bill is actually to give the e Safety Commission of
Speaker 4: those powers so you can get in touch and say, hey,
Speaker 4: this is a deep fac of me. I didn't consent
Speaker 4: to this, this is this I don't want this up there,
Speaker 4: and that they can then issue a directive to the
Speaker 4: social media company to take it down.
Speaker 3: And then, as I said, you then have.
Speaker 4: Some sort of recourse through the courts if it has
Speaker 4: genuinely caused you you damage. So you know, I think
Speaker 4: this is really about our laws evolving with technology and
Speaker 4: putting some safeguards in place, engaging in the in the
Speaker 4: debate around AI, I'm really concerned that you have a
Speaker 4: lot of companies and it seems politicians focus on all
Speaker 4: of the upside. This is so amazing for productivity, for
Speaker 4: our economy, for all these things, and yet we're not
Speaker 4: actually looking at well, there are probably some real.
Speaker 3: Downsides to this.
Speaker 4: One is pretend this sort of identity theft essentially replicating
Speaker 4: someone without their consent, and so I do think this
Speaker 4: task is urgent and really have been saying to the
Speaker 4: government for years now, you've got to get cracking on
Speaker 4: this because AI is moving fast and you're certainly.
Speaker 1: Not coming up how AI can disrupt elections and how
Speaker 1: political parties exempt themselves from the rules that everyone else
Speaker 1: has to follow. Let's talk a little bit more about
Speaker 1: the implications when this kind of material is put out there.
Speaker 1: We could use a specific example. During the last election campaign,
Speaker 1: you created fake videos of Dutton and alb and Easy
Speaker 1: to highlight how easy it is to do that they
Speaker 1: were obviously fake.
Speaker 2: That my government will be introducing legislation into the Parliament,
Speaker 2: so we'll see a three year, phased in complete ban
Speaker 2: on all forms of gambling advertising.
Speaker 1: Alvin Easy, I think the one that you created was
Speaker 1: promising to ban gambling ads, which.
Speaker 3: He's obviously did that.
Speaker 1: So tell me a bit about how deep fakes have
Speaker 1: been used in politics here and overseas, and then I
Speaker 1: suppose the effect on the public when those kinds of
Speaker 1: videos are put out there.
Speaker 4: In the last parliament, I really urged the government to
Speaker 4: act before the election to rule out the use of
Speaker 4: deep fakes and political advertising. They didn't have any interest
Speaker 4: in it, thankfully, it didn't seem to play a part
Speaker 4: in our election. But there are examples from South Korea
Speaker 4: and the US where deep fakes of politicians were created.
Speaker 3: In the South Korea example, the parliament.
Speaker 4: They acted very quickly to put some very heavy penalties.
Speaker 3: On the use of deep fakes in elections.
Speaker 4: In the US, we saw a voice clone of than
Speaker 4: President Biden tell people not to turn up in one
Speaker 4: of the primaries.
Speaker 5: What a bunch of malarkey. We know the value of
Speaker 5: voting democratic when our votes count. It's important that you
Speaker 5: save your vote for the November election. We'll need your
Speaker 5: help in electing Democrats up and down the ticket. Voting
Speaker 5: this Tuesday only enables the Republicans in their quest to
Speaker 5: elect Donald Trump again.
Speaker 4: So you know, there's I think huge potential to destabilize
Speaker 4: the democratic processes. That's one thing, and I think that
Speaker 4: should have been a priority. And hopefully for the next
Speaker 4: section we'll have some safeguards in place, and can we
Speaker 4: talk about the issue.
Speaker 1: I guess a bit more broadly than just deep fakes.
Speaker 1: I mean, you made a number of recommendations to the
Speaker 1: Senate Committee on Adopting AI, and that was all about
Speaker 1: how AI should be regulated in particular to protect the
Speaker 1: political system. But when you look at how quickly the
Speaker 1: technology is moving, what do you think we need to
Speaker 1: see in terms of guardrails.
Speaker 4: Well, I mean at the press conference, I say, when
Speaker 4: I announced this, the Member for Curtain, Kate Cheney and
Speaker 4: Independent from w A was calling for an AI safety Institute.
Speaker 4: I see today the government has announced they're going to
Speaker 4: do it, which is which is a great thing. I
Speaker 4: think that's a step forward. But again we're sort of
Speaker 4: on the back foot here. Everyone knows how fast AI
Speaker 4: is moving. Yes, we need we need to body a
Speaker 4: safety institute that employees like genuine experts in this space
Speaker 4: to advise government free of sort of industry spin on this.
Speaker 3: These are the things you need to put in place.
Speaker 4: Then I think we need an overarching AI Safety Act.
Speaker 4: This is the kind of technology where you can't constantly
Speaker 4: be legislating against it. We actually need some broad safeguards.
Speaker 4: This is what you can use it for, this is
Speaker 4: what you can't use it for. And we need to
Speaker 4: then use that, I guess to connect with like minded
Speaker 4: countries you know, the EU, the UK, Canada and ensure
Speaker 4: that we're we're sort of creating this. I guess system
Speaker 4: of laws that are comparable and really do protect citizens
Speaker 4: rights ahead of these enormous companies which clearly, I mean,
Speaker 4: their ethics don't don't. The only thing they seem to
Speaker 4: care about is you know, winning the AI race and
Speaker 4: making a lot of money.
Speaker 3: So I think that's one thing.
Speaker 4: I think we're also really not talking about potential impacts
Speaker 4: on labor markets, on people's jobs, whether that's white collar jobs.
Speaker 3: And I think particularly sort of entry.
Speaker 4: Level jobs, like who is going to be able to
Speaker 4: get those entry level jobs if there are you know,
Speaker 4: AI agents able to do this sort of work. And
Speaker 4: then you look at companies like Amazon and they are
Speaker 4: you know, full steam ahead on trying to automate so
Speaker 4: much of their supply chain and even delivery. So I
Speaker 4: think these are very real risks that for a long
Speaker 4: time we've thought, well, that's just a long way over
Speaker 4: the horizon, that's not worry about it. But I really
Speaker 4: think that as Parliament, that's our job. We should be
Speaker 4: looking ahead and saying these things could be coming, let's
Speaker 4: have a very serious conversation about them and then put
Speaker 4: some safeguards in place. And sadly, you think that's really
Speaker 4: been missing and.
Speaker 1: What about on the idea of how political parties collect
Speaker 1: and use data. Do you have concerns about how that
Speaker 1: data is retained and whether or not it is used
Speaker 1: to train AA?
Speaker 3: I do.
Speaker 4: I mean, you know, this is something Independence have been
Speaker 4: banging on about when it comes to data harvesting. You know,
Speaker 4: major parties send out these forms saying, hey, do you
Speaker 4: want to do your postal vote? It kind of looks
Speaker 4: like an AEC official form. You send them all this
Speaker 4: data and then they, you know, put it into their system.
Speaker 4: The major parties have exempted themselves from the Privacy Act,
Speaker 4: from the Spam Act. I just don't think that that
Speaker 4: cuts it. And so I think, yeah, we should be
Speaker 4: asking the the major parties what their policies are around AI.
Speaker 4: What are they actually feeding into you know AI platforms.
Speaker 4: We don't really know. But again, like these are conversations
Speaker 4: we should be we should be having.
Speaker 1: And the government does currently have a review into AI underway.
Speaker 1: It's set to wrap by the end of the year.
Speaker 1: What would you like to see come out of it?
Speaker 4: Well, I mean they did a lot of reviewing in
Speaker 4: the last term of parliament, so I'd be interested what
Speaker 4: came of those reviews. I would hope that there would
Speaker 4: be a broad AI sort of safety act that would
Speaker 4: actually look at all these things in a really holistic
Speaker 4: way and put some safeguards in place. I have been
Speaker 4: worried about the influence of industry. Seems like there's been
Speaker 4: a big shift in the government sort of talking points
Speaker 4: since the election. But you know, we'll give them the
Speaker 4: benefit of the doubt until this review comes out and
Speaker 4: see what it says.
Speaker 1: When you say industry, you mean what tech industry talking points?
Speaker 3: Yeah, big tech, you know, open AI.
Speaker 4: Yeah, all the all the all the players who seem
Speaker 4: to have a endless supply of money and a genuinely
Speaker 4: in a in a race to dominate this space.
Speaker 1: Well, Devid, thank you so much for your time.
Speaker 3: Thanks Ruby.
Speaker 1: By the way, what is the latest on the Parliamentary
Speaker 1: Sports Club? But you are you back playing?
Speaker 4: I'm not actually, you know, publicly they said I was
Speaker 4: invited back, but I haven't heard a word from them.
Speaker 4: So I've just been doing my own thing in the mornings,
Speaker 4: running with the dog what's the leading flycatcher? Chasing a
Speaker 4: little sparrow hawk this morning, which is pretty fun.
Speaker 1: So waiting for the official invite, but not sure if
Speaker 1: it's coming.
Speaker 4: Well, I actually I have no interest in going back
Speaker 4: while they are sort of this cash for access scheme.
Speaker 4: I totally disagree with the whole the whole setup, and
Speaker 4: so I don't know, we'll see. They've kind of said
Speaker 4: the they may review the policy. But I mean one
Speaker 4: of the things I'm concerned about is that a lot
Speaker 4: of people just think, well, this is just normal and
Speaker 4: this is how things operate, and I think that kind
Speaker 4: of says a lot about the.
Speaker 3: Problem with it.
Speaker 1: Also in the news, Labor has told government departments and
Speaker 1: agencies to find savings up to five percent of their
Speaker 1: budgets as it tries to reign in the deficit. Finance
Speaker 1: Minister Katie Gallaher has denied the call amounts to cuts,
Speaker 1: but unions and independents are warning it could mean job
Speaker 1: losses in the public service and hit agencies such as
Speaker 1: the CSIRO and the AFP. It comes after Labor campaigned
Speaker 1: against Peter Dutton's pledge at the last election to cut
Speaker 1: the forty one thousand public service jobs created in Labour's
Speaker 1: last term, and One Nation leader Pauline Hanson has been
Speaker 1: suspended from the Senate for seven sitting days after wearing
Speaker 1: a burker in the Senate chamber. Senator Hanson wore the
Speaker 1: garment as a stunt to call for a nationwide ban
Speaker 1: on burkers and head coverings, refusing to leave the Senate
Speaker 1: floor after she was sanctioned. After her suspension was ordered,
Speaker 1: Senator Hanson told the chamber the people will judge me
Speaker 1: at the next election. I'm Ruby Jones. This is seven am.
Speaker 1: Thanks for listening.