Looks like voat.com/v/deepfakes has already existed for while in anticipation.
Reddit bans 'deepfakes' AI porn communities
11–20 of 88 posts
Re: Reddit bans 'deepfakes' AI porn communities
#12Ban all you want, it’s not illegal, and silly to suggest as much.
Here’s a picture I drew of your mom. Look at those stink lines.
Arrest me.
Re: Reddit bans 'deepfakes' AI porn communities
#13Fake porn of celebrities has been prevalent on the Internet for a long time. I don't have precise statistics, but I think it might predate the web. For the most part it hasn't been particularly controversial. Now that advances in technology have significantly improved the quality, everybody suddenly has a problem with it.
Let's back this up a few steps. You're an actor, you appear on television. By being filmed and accepting the pay offered to you, you're agreeing to allow these images of you be disseminated to the general public, for their enjoyment. But what if somebody finds you attractive, and looks at your picture whilst... you know. Can you sue? No, they're well within their rights to do so. What if they cut your face out and place it over a Playboy centerfold? Same deal. Several technogical innovations later, here we are. Fundamentally, nothing has changed. Fundamentally, people are still 100% within their rights to combine images legally obtained in this way. And post them online. This may not be what the Internet was created for, but this was always what it was used for.
Re: Reddit bans 'deepfakes' AI porn communities
#14I'm on the fence on this one. If I draw a stick figure and put your name above it, is that unethical? What if I add a speech bubble saying something risqué? What if I'm a talented artist and I draw something pretty life-like? I don't see the lines here being too clear without claiming down on all expression.
Re: Reddit bans 'deepfakes' AI porn communities
#15There's no way of putting this tech back in the box. And it's only going to get more powerful. What if someone combines it with some kind of "deep ageing", to create artificial child porn? Sexual representations of children, even if completely artificial and involving no victims, are illegal in many jurisdictions, but not all. We're only scratching the surface of what semantic editing of video is going to be capable…
The tech is just a special effect, and I find it weird that so many people go straight to the most fucked up use case, or even imagine new possibilities (deep aging? Jesus) or even (elsewhere) start arguing for more laws because of it.
Meanwhile nobody fixates on all the horrible stuff that can be done with cameras or Photoshop or Poser.
You can, or will be able to soon, do previously Hollywood standard effects at home. You could put Tom Cruise in your wedding video. You could put yourself in Mission Impossible. You could have the cast of the Magnificent Seven in the movie you created with a few mates. You could do tons of imaginative, funny, creative stuff.
Celeb porn, sticking the head of a baby on the body of an adult porn star or any other sad/weird porn related use - all of which has done with images for a quarter of a century - are the least interesting things about this.
As to the reddit ban, I doubt anyone is surprised.
Re: Reddit bans 'deepfakes' AI porn communities
#16Ban all you want, it’s not illegal, and silly to suggest as much. Here’s a picture I drew of your mom. Look at those stink lines. Arrest me.
It can actually be considered as a form of harassement or defamation. While it might be a gray area in the US, it is likely not going to be the same in Europe.
Re: Reddit bans 'deepfakes' AI porn communities
#17Fake porn of celebrities has been prevalent on the Internet for a long time. I don't have precise statistics, but I think it might predate the web. For the most part it hasn't been particularly controversial. Now that advances in technology have significantly improved the quality, everybody suddenly has a problem with it. Let's back this up a few steps. You're an actor, you appear on television. By being filmed and a…
> And post them online.
Mass redistribution of somebody image is not a "right".
Re: Reddit bans 'deepfakes' AI porn communities
#18Fake porn of celebrities has been prevalent on the Internet for a long time. I don't have precise statistics, but I think it might predate the web. For the most part it hasn't been particularly controversial. Now that advances in technology have significantly improved the quality, everybody suddenly has a problem with it. Let's back this up a few steps. You're an actor, you appear on television. By being filmed and a…
I'm pretty sure celebrities have also been able to request the removal of fake porn featuring themselves, and online communities have been able to ban the posting of it. So we're not really in any particularly new territory here.
Re: Reddit bans 'deepfakes' AI porn communities
#19These bannings and the process making the news will definitely have the Streisand effect. The community might move on from Reddit but so many people have been made aware of the possibilities that it's impossible to keep a lid on it.
Re: Reddit bans 'deepfakes' AI porn communities
#20Fake porn of celebrities has been prevalent on the Internet for a long time. I don't have precise statistics, but I think it might predate the web. For the most part it hasn't been particularly controversial. Now that advances in technology have significantly improved the quality, everybody suddenly has a problem with it. Let's back this up a few steps. You're an actor, you appear on television. By being filmed and a…
> people are still 100% within their rights to combine images legally obtained in this way. And post them online.
Are they? If you distribute movies and media to the public, you normally are breaking laws. (Hence the infamous FBI warning on movies for a couple decades now.) Likewise, you cannot just use people's likeness in marketing and other public uses without their permission. So I'm not at all sure that just because you have an image, you have the rights to create and distribute derivative works from them.