3 ms·
Except the actual human being who resembles the deepfake image isn't actually involved at all. People are acting like a "deepfake of a person" is something dif
by floor2 2y ago
Except the actual human being who resembles the deepfake image isn't actually involved at all.
People are acting like a "deepfake of a person" is something different than a drawing, painting, song, poem or any other artistic creation inspired by, based on, or with elements drawn from a real person.
"If someone is deepfaking you" is such a weird imaginary problem. Someone might be imagining you. Someone might see you in a coffee shop while writing a screenplay and use the outfit you're wearing to describe a character in their story. Who cares?
If someone is committing fraud by trying to pass off a deepfake as a real photo, then we already have laws around fraud, defamation, harassment to cover that. If someone makes a deepfake that looks similar to a real person for their own amusement, that's no different than writing fan-fiction or sketching in a notebook.
- 23B1 2y agoYou should think long and hard about the second- and third-order effects.
- catlover76 2y ago[dead]
- chrisjj 2y agoNo such thing. Distribution of an image is not an effect of its creation.
- 23B1 2y agoThen you've clearly failed to think about those downstream effects. It's okay, a lot of people – not just in tech – find this challenging.
- edanm 2y agoI think it would be better if you gave your views on what the downstream effects are, instead of just saying that other people can't think of them.