3 ms·
Generally there is a distinction between deepfaking and AI generated or am I mistaken here ? Is there a preferred nomenclature ?
by jokowueu 3y ago
Generally there is a distinction between deepfaking and AI generated or am I mistaken here ?
Is there a preferred nomenclature ?
- basisword 3y agoDeepfake utilises AI, no? Either way I feel like in the context of a national news article AI is being used in a colloquial sense.
- PeterisP 3y agoFrom the AI industry perspective, I'd call it "deepfake" if it's generated as the original deepfake method did, by taking a real image or video and replacing only the face, and "AI generated" if the whole image was generated. But perhaps this is a technical distinction that will go away soon, or perhaps has already disappeared in colloquial usage.
- zmgsabst 3y agoI always used it literally: “Deepfake”: a fake generated by a DNN, or tool chain comprised primarily of such.
- PeterisP 3y agoWhile from technical perspective there are multiple quite different methods to create images, I don't think that there is (or should be, or can be) a clear boundary for social and legal purposes. It's clear that are a bunch of generated fake images with a face that looks like the impersonated victims and a naked body. Does it matter if that face was copy-pasted from an existing photo of that person or manipulated by a skilled artist to look like that person or AI-generated to look that person? And with respect to the impersonated victims, does it matter if the naked body came from a real photo of someone else, or was drawn by a skilled artist, or was generated by AI?
- zingababba 3y agoI agree intent remains the same in either case. In this case the intent is desiring to create a nude likeness of an individual using some degree of original material so that the final creation appears indistinguishable from a genuine product. In terms of law the technical solution used to accomplish the likeness should not be relevant.