I like a green checkmark next to a photo better than giving more power to whoever you think should be the one determining and enforcing those consequences.

The consequences I mean are those of the public: proving that the ruling party forged images isn't going to get people to change their votes. You can build the green checkmark, but you can't get people to care about it.

I see this as completely different issues. Whether AI exists or not this is and was a problem. I’m proposing technical solution because AI fakes are a technical problem. And yeah if people get used to green checkmark you can’t just pump fakes willy nilly, you actually have to put some effort, as before AI. I guess the problem I want to solve is having to live in a world where you have to assume absolutely everything is 100% fake all the time. Because this just puts everyone in their respective truth bubbles even more. Any objectivity we can return to the world is a good thing, IMO.

First you have to solve the collect action problem of getting everyone to care about the green checkmark, then you have to solve the new technical problem of just making photographs of high-quality altered images.

I fully acknowledge the second issue, and have offered some potential solutions in my other comments, but I think this can have tremendous impact even if you don’t solve the second issue in first draft.

It's not even a solution because it completely ignores the analog hole.

I explicitly acknowledge analog hole in my other comments in this thread and suggest advanced sensors (as used in existing biometric authentication) and LIDAR as potential solution. Nevertheless, I think this system can be very useful even without those countermeasures and even if it can still be bypassed with effort. Additionally, if the signatures are securely time-stamped it makes proving which photo is genuine straightforward.

It's not even a solution because it completely ignores the analog hole.

Not to mention the inevitable abuse by whoever controls the keys.