Said an unnamed AI user, quoted in "'Claudia’ offers nude photos for pay. Experts say she’s an AI fake. Will users feel ripped off as image-generating AI tools fuel a new wave of porn and scams?" (WaPo).
Isn't it better if real human beings are not used in making porn?
"[W]ho really cares?" I suppose some people care, just like you might care if a movie has real-life stunts or CGI animation. You like thinking that somebody really did that.
A separate problem is "inpainting," which works the face of a real person onto the AI-created body.
Posts
19 comments:
Porn bodies by AI or plastic surgeons what is the difference, both fake.
This has been going on for maybe 20 years. Online IDs are routinely faked, and may have contributed to the rapid rise of transgendered and gender-fluid people in real life. They don't feel any consequences for slipping between roles, and it's been advantageous to them personally.
"What about the sex worker jobs?" they'll say. Some say porn and prostitution are exploitation, others say it's a "fun" career path. Long ago California legalized XXX film making as the industry was happening in rental houses all across the LA area. At the same time, DAs like Kamala Harris prosecuted low-level prostitution. Half baked.
So no, people aren't who they say they are online but our sense of morals, sense of gravity, and the belief of needing to breathe oxygen are in deep trouble. I sincerely expect subgroups to break off and form neo-Amish communities. Healthy, normal human lives? Hmmm? Is there a stable and sustainable Brave New World? TBD.
What if an AI app generated child porn on demand? Assume no pictures of identifiable children and no harm to children. What is the rationale for prohibiting it, besides "Ick"? It would make creating real child porn less profitable and thus protect children.
It seems like the issue has basically jumped the logical shark already. From a logical standpoint, a digital image is a pattern of pixels, generated by a computer from a pattern of bits on an electronic storage device. Is the provenance of the ones and zeroes on the storage device really that important? It kind of feels like it is. If A happens, and then B happens as a result, B carries some of the emotional import of A. But it's a hard argument to make. If a digital tree falls in a digital forest ...
Maybe it's the Uncanny Valley, but those 'women' look too processed and filtered.
Programmers/AI photo generators need to start adding imperfections.
As someone who directed photo shoots for decades, these aren't even close to looking like real people.
But I'm sure it will improve...
The modern digital model of "black face"... "face of black".
Wasn't there a ruling that computer generated kiddie porn was legal?
IIRC the theory was that the law was to protect children from sexual exploitation, but there was no child involved.
Weird love scene in "Blade Runner 2049." Hologram of one beautiful woman, the object of fantasy, trained to love Ryan Gosling; a very real flesh and blood woman.
Is it real or is it Memorex?
"Isn't it better if real human beings are not used in making porn?"
If you want to rob thousands of enterprising women of their income, yes. Of course, many just "use" themselves.
I've been told non-human animated porn is already widely available. Not sure about market share.
This has probably been going on for a very long time. In Ghost World (2001), Steve Buscemi's character is looking at computer-generated child pornography and saying that it's legal because no real human child posed for it (an interesting question for legal experts).
Nobody's going to be disappointed or feel cheated. What else is pornography about but fantasy?
I recall the thought experiment of computer AI generated kiddie porn. Is it legal? Is it ethical? No children are directly involved or harmed.
The average person who’s looking at this stuff is not the average person.
"I recall the thought experiment of computer AI generated kiddie porn. Is it legal? Is it ethical? No children are directly involved or harmed."
Don't these AI programs we have now do their work by having actual photography/video dumped into them? Wouldn't real children have been used to produce that material? When a human being is found with a giant trove of such material, they are sent to prison. How could this material be used?
@Althouse: "Wouldn't real children have been used to produce that material?"
But you see, they harvest and process publicly available social media photos of children playing without knowing their identities. Many parents let pre-pubescent girls swim without bras / tops, and it's not hard to Photoshop out clothing either.
It's also not hard to digitally paste an adult woman's body parts onto the photo of a child, or add a different face to a child's body. No single person matches the entire photo and none of the original photographs were illegal. A final kiddie p0rn image may be a composite of several law-abiding people and a fake background. Where is the legal recourse if all body parts are not identifiable and the face is digitally generated from scratch?
Isn't it better if real human beings are not used in making porn?
Depends on what you think better about it. If you are concerned about abuse in the porn industry, then perhaps. Depends on if the AI porn is deep fakes abusing someone’s image or likeness, and whether a body double is still there to be abused. Depends if you are concerned about the effect of porn on society and that now people can make computer generated porn that depicts acts that would otherwise be illegal if using real actors doing the performance.
Wouldn't real children have been used to produce that material?
No. Having adults portray children is acting that existed long before CGI. CGI just makes it easier to de-age.
I think nothing will change but the cost in production being lowered and increasing supply. If you like that, then is better, right?
FYI, this stuff has been in gaming for quite some time. Indeed CGI in gaming has often been far better than trying to clip-in non CGI human acting, with the latter usually pulling you out of the game in much the same way it is all the reverse for CGI in movies.
There's an old Bugs Bunny cartoon which ends with a glamorous female robot approaching Bugs. He dismisses it, "Mechanical." It then kisses him and he gets all googly, "So it's mechanical!"--and mechanically follows it out of frame.
What if an AI app generated child porn on demand? Assume no pictures of identifiable children and no harm to children. What is the rationale for prohibiting it, besides "Ick"? It would make creating real child porn less profitable and thus protect children.
There is a deep seeded belief that consumers of various deviant porn are sometimes motivated by the experience to pursue the real thing.
Thus, computer generated experiences stimulate real sex crime, and should be illegal.
Not sure of the actual science involved, but intuition suggests something like "mostly not, but across a thousand consumers, that probably does happen".
We don't have enough of an enlightened, civilized society to handle the technology we have today. Maybe in a hundred years or so, being optimistic.
Post a Comment