3 ms·
> There is a difference in ease of use. I could never use photoshop to fake something like that even if I wanted to. You couldn't, but basically any VFX shop e
by carlosdp 4y ago
> There is a difference in ease of use. I could never use photoshop to fake something like that even if I wanted to.
You couldn't, but basically any VFX shop easily could. Point is, it doesn't make anything possible that wasn't already possible, it just makes it more accessible. That's an inevitability with technology, as time goes on. The counter is not to try and suppress it, that has never worked and never will.
- derefr 4y agoWhat motivation would a VFX shop have to do such a thing, though? (Money, sure, but what's a motive strong enough to be worth commissioning them?) It's always individuals who want to harm others in this particular way; and individuals don't throw around big-VFX-project amounts of money on petty revenge. But they'd certainly spend $20. DDoS attacks got a lot (1000x) more commonplace once there were DDoS services that let you buy an hour of attacking someone for $20. Same idea here.
- chii 4y agoand you can easily just drive your car into somebody to kill them. DDoS services are almost always purely malicious (you can _may be_ argue that you can use them for pen-testing or load-testing). But cars are not just purely malicious; there's a lot of useful things cars can do, and that's why the dangers of car ownership is outweighed by the benefits, as judged by society - we just have some road rules, and licenses, so that people know to use them responsibly. Why not the same with an AI model?
- johannboehme 4y agowe are talking pictures atm. not videos. I bet you could get as good as SD with two weeks of free time, lots of youtube tutorials and with a photoshop license.