This is mostly about swapping faces. You take a video and a photo of someone’s face. Software can replace the face of someone in the video with that face. That’s been around for a decade or so. There are other ways of doing it.
When the face belongs to an underage individual, and the video is pornographic…
LLMs only do text.
Lemmy has various options to sort, eg by active. That surfaces posts that create engagement. It’s stuff that polarizes.
I find interesting stuff either by sorting by new in my subscribed communities. Or by looking for something that causes a stir. The last one creates exactly those problems that are often ascribed to “The Algorithm”.
The most deepfaked women are certainly actresses or musicians; attractive people that appear on screens and are known by much of the population.
In some countries, they do not allow people to appear on-screen exactly because of that. Or at least, that’s one justification. If the honor or humanity of a woman depends on sexual feelings that she might or might not arouse in men, then women cannot be free. And men probably can’t be free either.
At no point have I claimed that anyone is being liberated here. I do not know what will happen. I’m just pointing out how your message is harmful.
Historically, the respectability of a woman depended on her sexuality. In many conservative cultures and communities, that is still true. Spreading the message that deepfakes are some particular horrible form of harassment reinforces that view.
If having your head on the model of a nude model is a terrible crime, then what does that say about the nude model? What does it say about women who simply happen to develop a larger bosom or lips? What does it say about sex before marriage?
The implicit message here is simply harmful to girls and women.
That doesn’t mean that we should tolerate harassment. But it needs to be understood that we can do no more to stop this kind of harassment than we can do to stop any other kind.
Yeah, this is worse than downloading a car.
- Conditions for License Grant. You represent and warrant that You will not, access, download, install, run, deploy, integrate, modify, or otherwise use the Model, directly or indirectly, within the European Union.
Stay safe, people.
Fair. It’s certainly an issue that someone like Musk could weaponize Twitter.
Being active on Lemmy, not this one incidence in particular. This is one example showing that the spread of misinformation does not require any sinister force pulling strings.
I have an interest in internet regulation and so read various takes. The spread of mis- and disinformation is a frequent complaint about social media. Often, “The Algorithm” is blamed, rather than human nature. The role of influencers and traditional media tends to be ignored.
The original news was posted twice. Right now these posts have a score of 80 and 456 upvotes.
Being active on Lemmy has pretty much convinced me that claims about some evil algorithm being responsible for all the ills of social media are baseless.
When copying is legal for profit, it’s safe to assume that it’s also legal without profit.
If someone puts a camera in a locker room, that means that someone entered a space where you would usually feel safe. It implies the potential of a physical threat.
It also means that someone observed you when you were doing “secret” things. One may feel vulnerable in such situations. Even a seasoned nude model might be embarrassed to be seen while changing, maybe in a dishevelled state.
I would think it is very different. Unless you’re only thinking about the psychological effect on the viewer.