4 ms·

i am on the fence. using my face, and making money off it without my permission seems wrong. however, what if the 'animated' porn star just happens to look li

i am on the fence. using my face, and making money off it without my permission seems wrong. however, what if the 'animated' porn star just happens to look like me? inevitably, a generated porn star will look like SOMEONE. for me, this is getting murky. then there is the case that the program generates porn for me. if i privately generate porn using a famous person's image, to me - thats my right. no different than me fantasizing about them in my head.

ordinaryradical 9y ago
Just to clarify the conundrum in your second paragraph: this is definitively privileging your privacy over someone else’s. What you do in private is your business, yes, but that doesn’t give you the right to be a voyeur simply because you are doing so in seclusion. That’s why I think this is a poor argument.
- autokad 9y ago
  voyeur: "a person who gains sexual pleasure from watching others when they are naked or engaged in sexual activity." is not illegal. its kinda the very definition of watching porn. i wouldnt be violating their privacy any more than taping a picture to a pillow and humping it. are you claiming that is illegal? if not, then it feels like its the quality of the 'content' you are against, not the act.
  - gamblor956 9y ago
    Porn is consensual. Non-consensual voyeurism is usually a crime. (Generally turns on the expectation of privacy. If the watcher is observing from a non-publicly accessible location, they're probably guilty of voyeurism. Watching people go at it in a hotel room from the office across the street, generally wouldn't be a crime. Watching a non-consenual video recording generally wouldn't be a criminal act for the observer but would be a criminal act by the recorder, but this also depends on the content of the recording.)
- drusepth 9y ago
  Would you make that same argument toward someone fantasizing about someone in their mind? The two seem parallel to me; I would guess most people are either morally for or against both (even though, yes, one is way more extreme than the other), but I'm super curious about whether/why someone might think e.g. imagination is fine but private visualizations aren't (or vice versa).

ordinaryradical 9y ago

Just to clarify the conundrum in your second paragraph: this is definitively privileging your privacy over someone else’s. What you do in private is your business, yes, but that doesn’t give you the right to be a voyeur simply because you are doing so in seclusion. That’s why I think this is a poor argument.

autokad 9y ago
voyeur: "a person who gains sexual pleasure from watching others when they are naked or engaged in sexual activity." is not illegal. its kinda the very definition of watching porn. i wouldnt be violating their privacy any more than taping a picture to a pillow and humping it. are you claiming that is illegal? if not, then it feels like its the quality of the 'content' you are against, not the act.
- gamblor956 9y ago
  Porn is consensual. Non-consensual voyeurism is usually a crime. (Generally turns on the expectation of privacy. If the watcher is observing from a non-publicly accessible location, they're probably guilty of voyeurism. Watching people go at it in a hotel room from the office across the street, generally wouldn't be a crime. Watching a non-consenual video recording generally wouldn't be a criminal act for the observer but would be a criminal act by the recorder, but this also depends on the content of the recording.)
drusepth 9y ago
Would you make that same argument toward someone fantasizing about someone in their mind? The two seem parallel to me; I would guess most people are either morally for or against both (even though, yes, one is way more extreme than the other), but I'm super curious about whether/why someone might think e.g. imagination is fine but private visualizations aren't (or vice versa).