5 ms·
Hrmn. I could be missing something, and I’m generally for freedom and all. But working on this seems like a shitty thing to do. What is this for, other than
by AgentOrange1234 7y ago
Hrmn. I could be missing something, and I’m generally for freedom and all. But working on this seems like a shitty thing to do. What is this for, other than harassment?
- Rebelgecko 7y agoI haven't looked at how good the output is, but maybe it gives people plausible deniability if their iCloud account gets hacked?
- kmm 7y agoPrivate "personal use". Creepy, but not harassing if it never leaves the user's computer. Celebrity fakes have existed for decades, it's very possible I'm naive, but I assumed it was for, uh, fantasy aides.
- LeonB 7y agoIt’s for harassment. People who even look at this are basically outing themselves as terrible people, or utterly devoid of empathy.
- gdy 7y agoLook, thought police has arrived.
- LeonB 7y agoWhat is your valid and constructive reason for being interested in defending this code? How do you weigh it up in relation to the abuse and harassment that it could be primarily used for?
- gdy 7y agoUpholding freedom of speech and thought. Now, what is the reason for using language like 'people who even look at this are ... outing themselves as terrible people'?
- LeonB 7y agoOver here in the real world, the primary use of this code is for harassment and abuse. Upholding people's freedom to make authentic looking photos of women without their clothes on, regardless of their consent, is a pretty low form of "speech" and not a hill I'd choose to die on. It's illegal to use that code for its intended purpose in some jurisdictions (such as the one I'm in) and will be illegal in more once the laws catch up.
- gdy 7y agoYou haven't answered the question.
- randyrand 7y agoWould you argue that porn has no benefit? Id argue that billions of people have more enjoyable lives because of porn. That’s not to dismiss the potential for misuse.
- goldcd 7y agoIf you want to come at this from the anti-porn side - "No longer will broken people be forced to perform pornographic acts" or "Previously people lived in fear of previous pornographic acts living on online after they'd moved on - now it's "probably just another of those millions of deep-fakes""
- AgentOrange1234 7y agoI would not argue at all against porn. However, I think the consent of the participants is a bare minimum for acceptability, and this seems to violate that directly.
- randyrand 7y ago> What is this for, other than harassment? I was answering that question you posed. It's not just for harassment. It's mostly for porn.
- belorn 7y agoI can think of several potential application, if somewhat unlikely, through most is just adaptation of the original deepfake algorithm. It could be used as a replacement for stunt doubles. The nude scenes in Game of Throne was not always liked by the acters, and the walk of shame actually used a nude stunt double for some of it (https://ew.com/article/2015/06/18/game-thrones-lena-headey-nude-double-van-cleave/ https://ew.com/article/2015/06/18/game-thrones-lena-headey-n...). Deepfake and DeepNude could also replace stun doubles where the scene is too dangerous thus improving safety. It could be used to create a better base model in animation so that clothing can be added more realistic on top, which could be useful when making remakes/remaster of old movies. In gaming it could also be used as a faster/better method to create realistic bodies, improving immersion and graphic representation. Nude mods has always been rather popular in RPG's. In theory we could also see similar algorithms in security to get an estimate body shape in relation to clothing in order to detect hidden weapons.