3 ms·

Actual nudes are even worse than AI nudes. With AI nudes - the victim knows they are fake, which provides some emotional distance (similar to when actors choos

Actual nudes are even worse than AI nudes. With AI nudes - the victim knows they are fake, which provides some emotional distance (similar to when actors choose to use prostetics or doubles for a nude scene: the viewer doesn't know but the actor still feels more comfortable) - most of them are bad enough that the discerning eye can spot it as an AI image (many chronically online people are scarily good at that) - they can be proven to be fake because they are just an imagined version of your body ('look, I have a tatoo/mole/scar/blemish here that isn't in the nude, it's obviously fake') AI nudes are still pretty bad, but services that turn up nude images of you by indexing the internet with face-detection are way worse

scarface_74 1y ago
But most people don’t have a discerning eye. I’ve never used a nudify site. But uploading a picture of me and my wife to Grok and letting it make a 6 second video is already pretty good. On one, the only thing I noticed was that the reflection in a window wasn’t following the movement. Also, if you down sample the quality of the video, it would be even harder to tell it was a fake. That’s neither here nor there. Would you want even a fake nude of you online?
- AlecSchueler 1y ago
  > Would you want even a fake nude of you online? That's neither here nor there, the claim was that deepfakes were a replacement for actual nudes, but you're maybe overlooking that the actual invasiveness is an important part of what the abuser finds appealing about the real thing. Both are of course terrible, they're both abusive and both are becoming illegal in more and more places, but one is more invasive than the other.