30 votes

Creator of DeepNude, app that undresses photos of women, takes it offline

50 comments

  1. [30]
    dubteedub
    Link
    I really hate the trend in tech folks to try and weasel their way to separate themselves from the ethics of their products. It baffles me that you can make a product or service and put it on the...

    "We don't want to make money this way," the statement said. "Surely some copies of DeepNude will be shared on the web, but we don't want to be the ones to sell it.” He claimed that he's just a "technology enthusiast,” motivated by curiosity and a desire to learn. This is the same refrain the maker of deepfakes gave Motherboard in December 2017: that he was just a programmer with an interest in machine learning. But as the subsequent rise of fake revenge porn created using deepfakes illustrated, tinkering using women's bodies is a damaging, sometimes life-destroying venture for the victims of "enthusiasts."

    I really hate the trend in tech folks to try and weasel their way to separate themselves from the ethics of their products.

    It baffles me that you can make a product or service and put it on the internet and never once stop to consider the impact that your product would have on society.

    Ethics really needs to be included in the curriculum for any computer science or technology program.

    38 votes
    1. [3]
      cptcobalt
      Link Parent
      The idea that they're now saying that they didn't want to make money, and yet sold it for money is downright hysterical. I don't believe them one bit. Their response is basically being terrified...

      The idea that they're now saying that they didn't want to make money, and yet sold it for money is downright hysterical.

      I don't believe them one bit. Their response is basically being terrified of outrage & internet tribal mentalities. I'm not going to stay they deserve the response, but, I'm not surprised.

      You're right, this would make for a great ethics case study. I hope this hits "CS Ethics 101" textbooks.

      30 votes
      1. [2]
        mozz
        Link Parent
        Saying "We don't want to do this anymore" is very different than saying "We didn't want to do this from the beginning". It's very possible that the author witnessed the consequences of what they...

        The idea that they're now saying that they didn't want to make money, and yet sold it for money is downright hysterical.

        I don't believe them one bit. Their response is basically being terrified of outrage & internet tribal mentalities. I'm not going to stay they deserve the response, but, I'm not surprised.

        Saying "We don't want to do this anymore" is very different than saying "We didn't want to do this from the beginning". It's very possible that the author witnessed the consequences of what they created and had a sincere change of heart.

        7 votes
        1. rkcr
          Link Parent
          One must live a pretty sheltered life not to foresee the consequences of DeepNude.

          One must live a pretty sheltered life not to foresee the consequences of DeepNude.

          22 votes
    2. mat
      Link Parent
      FTFY. Ethics, critical thinking, logic, basic reasoning. Basically, we should teach kids philosophy. Because they need the tools it teaches to understand and operate in the modern world.

      Ethics really needs to be included in the curriculum for any computer science or technology program.

      FTFY. Ethics, critical thinking, logic, basic reasoning. Basically, we should teach kids philosophy. Because they need the tools it teaches to understand and operate in the modern world.

      20 votes
    3. vakieh
      Link Parent
      I teach ethics to CS students - just as I was taught ethics in my degree way back when. It is required for your degree to be accredited by various professional bodies. However, all you can do when...

      I teach ethics to CS students - just as I was taught ethics in my degree way back when. It is required for your degree to be accredited by various professional bodies. However, all you can do when teaching ethics is tell people what it is, why it's important, how they should incorporate it into their professional practice. You CANNOT force someone to be ethical, it just can't be done. The most you can force is for people to act in a legally allowed way, anything beyond that you can convince and you can motivate, but you can never force or hit 100%.

      And unfortunately for the perception of my industry negativity bias is a thing that is very active here (you are displaying it right now) and that 1% of unethical little shits I'd like to fail but aren't allowed to define our image to everyone else.

      10 votes
    4. Bullmaestro
      Link Parent
      Ethics is currently on the accountancy curriculum for many global regulatory bodies, but this was mainly done in reaction to various major scandals. The major difference is that the tech industry...

      Ethics is currently on the accountancy curriculum for many global regulatory bodies, but this was mainly done in reaction to various major scandals. The major difference is that the tech industry is nowhere near as audited or regulated as the accountancy profession.

      If tech goes down a similar path, I can see ethics being taught out.

      9 votes
    5. [2]
      alyaza
      Link Parent
      well, completely ignoring the ethics or possibility of services having impact on society as a whole worked out for every big social media website or app before this point (at the expense of...

      It baffles me that you can make a product or service and put it on the internet and never once stop to consider the impact that your product would have on society.

      well, completely ignoring the ethics or possibility of services having impact on society as a whole worked out for every big social media website or app before this point (at the expense of everybody not running said websites and apps, of course), so why would these folks suddenly reconsider that just because of shit like this?

      6 votes
      1. dubteedub
        Link Parent
        It seems like the tides are turning, at least a bit, to hold these tech and social media companies accountable for their platforms. There is the antitrust probe of google in the US, more folks are...

        It seems like the tides are turning, at least a bit, to hold these tech and social media companies accountable for their platforms. There is the antitrust probe of google in the US, more folks are raising hell over twitter / facebook / youtube / reddit platforming hate, and we are starting to see some positive results, though minor.

        We have a long way to go, but we have to start somewhere.

        3 votes
    6. [12]
      jlong745
      Link Parent
      FWIW I had to take an ethics class as part of my CS degree.

      Ethics really needs to be included in the curriculum for any computer science or technology program.

      FWIW I had to take an ethics class as part of my CS degree.

      3 votes
      1. [10]
        Litmus2336
        Link Parent
        Yeah, every CS program I know teaches ethics. It's just that people don't follow it.

        Yeah, every CS program I know teaches ethics. It's just that people don't follow it.

        3 votes
        1. [8]
          culturedleftfoot
          Link Parent
          Because that one class isn't worth too much, quite frankly. One semester of ethics isn't going to reliably counteract 20 years of cultural programming. As @mat alluded, we need to teach kids...

          Because that one class isn't worth too much, quite frankly. One semester of ethics isn't going to reliably counteract 20 years of cultural programming. As @mat alluded, we need to teach kids philosophy across the board as they're growing up as a core part of modern education.

          8 votes
          1. [7]
            Litmus2336
            Link Parent
            I know a lot of people who were provided a good deal of philosophy education (at least 3 semesters in university, not including Middle and High school) but simply ignore it because you can make so...

            I know a lot of people who were provided a good deal of philosophy education (at least 3 semesters in university, not including Middle and High school) but simply ignore it because you can make so much money in tech building bad things. I think it's a bit naive to assume that more classes will lead to more learning. I'd rather get to the root of "why people in tech choose to do bad things", and I don't think it's because their all educated.

            4 votes
            1. [6]
              culturedleftfoot
              Link Parent
              I'm not talking about simply more classes, I'm talking about formative education. You understand the difference? It's like picking up a second language when you're 3 as opposed to when you're 21....

              I'm not talking about simply more classes, I'm talking about formative education. You understand the difference? It's like picking up a second language when you're 3 as opposed to when you're 21. Not only will your grasp of the language itself differ, but your experiences, your outlook, just about everything is set on a different path.

              4 votes
              1. [5]
                Litmus2336
                Link Parent
                Perhaps, I just don't necessarily agree with the idea that if we teach people, they will act differently. People are being offered 150k+ to do unethical stuff, many people would literally kill for...

                Perhaps, I just don't necessarily agree with the idea that if we teach people, they will act differently. People are being offered 150k+ to do unethical stuff, many people would literally kill for that opportunity. I think this goes beyond ethics, and more into societal reality. And I think the solution lies in remedying legal frameworks, rather than personal ethics.

                7 votes
                1. [4]
                  culturedleftfoot
                  Link Parent
                  If that weren't true, civilization would not exist. I think you are restricting yourself to a narrow viewpoint. Think about it, there are also many people who dream of seeing 150k in their bank...

                  Perhaps, I just don't necessarily agree with the idea that if we teach people, they will act differently.

                  If that weren't true, civilization would not exist.

                  I think you are restricting yourself to a narrow viewpoint. Think about it, there are also many people who dream of seeing 150k in their bank accounts who wouldn't dream of harming someone for it, despite being quite able, no? What do you think is the difference between those who would and those who wouldn't? Those who won't formed a worldview, over time, that makes them believe that taking a life is not worth that little. Do you think they came out of the womb with that in their mind? They were taught.

                  People make up society. Societal realities are in place because people make decisions informed by their ethics. Legal frameworks are shaped by the ethics of the decision makers. You want to change society on a fundamental level, you change the people.

                  5 votes
                  1. [3]
                    Litmus2336
                    Link Parent
                    Sure, but what percentage of people are in tech? 1%? .1%? Of course, education shapes society as a whole, but a very small proportion of people do a ton of the really bad, world altering stuff....

                    Sure, but what percentage of people are in tech? 1%? .1%?

                    Of course, education shapes society as a whole, but a very small proportion of people do a ton of the really bad, world altering stuff. While I appreciate the view of a society where everybody is ethical, and all children are taught ethics, I simply think that it is implausible to assume nobody will fall through the cracks. And that's why I think this needs a legalistic approach, because we shouldn't have a system where bad things don't happen because everyone is good. I really think we need backup plans based on the (necessary, in my mind) principle that people might sometimes do bad things.

                    Also, this is more of a sidepoint, but I am a moral absolutist and a moral objectivist, so I don't necessarily agree with the belief that people are solely 'taught' morality.

                    4 votes
                    1. [2]
                      culturedleftfoot
                      Link Parent
                      You are insisting upon missing the forest for the trees, my friend.

                      You are insisting upon missing the forest for the trees, my friend.

                      1 vote
                      1. Litmus2336
                        Link Parent
                        Regardless, I've enjoyed the conversation, and getting to hear your perspective. I do think you have a lot of valid points.

                        Regardless, I've enjoyed the conversation, and getting to hear your perspective. I do think you have a lot of valid points.

                        5 votes
        2. Micycle_the_Bichael
          Link Parent
          Not to say it isn't super common, but I didn't have to take an ethics class to get my CS degree and ethics were rarely talked about in my department despite going to a liberal arts school with a...

          Not to say it isn't super common, but I didn't have to take an ethics class to get my CS degree and ethics were rarely talked about in my department despite going to a liberal arts school with a strong philosophy department

      2. frostycakes
        Link Parent
        I had to for my business program as well (and they've been required there for longer than they were in CS programs-- my stepdad got a CS degree in the early 90s and only took ethics classes as...

        I had to for my business program as well (and they've been required there for longer than they were in CS programs-- my stepdad got a CS degree in the early 90s and only took ethics classes as part of his theology minor) but we all know the business world isn't exactly a model of ethical behavior.

        When the money is on the side of acting unethically, you're gonna get unethical actors.

        1 vote
    7. culturedleftfoot
      Link Parent
      Somehow, these same people never seem to reason, "Somebody's bound to blow up their house someday. The technology's out there, after all. Might as well be me."

      Somehow, these same people never seem to reason, "Somebody's bound to blow up their house someday. The technology's out there, after all. Might as well be me."

      1 vote
    8. [8]
      Grzmot
      Link Parent
      Ethics isn't going to teach these people that creating such applications isn't right. At best it will only anger everyone else studying the subject because they'll see it as collective punishment.

      Ethics isn't going to teach these people that creating such applications isn't right. At best it will only anger everyone else studying the subject because they'll see it as collective punishment.

      1. [7]
        teaearlgraycold
        Link Parent
        Learning ethics doesn't really qualify as collective punishment. My CS program required an ethics course. Most people enjoyed it.

        Learning ethics doesn't really qualify as collective punishment. My CS program required an ethics course. Most people enjoyed it.

        4 votes
        1. [6]
          Grzmot
          (edited )
          Link Parent
          We had Ethics and Gender Studies (which is mandatory in the 1st semester for everyone on my university), most likely because because the university had some political objective to prove. Everyone...

          We had Ethics and Gender Studies (which is mandatory in the 1st semester for everyone on my university), most likely because because the university had some political objective to prove.

          Everyone hated it and we still make jokes about it 2 years later.

          Additionally, yes they will because it's another exam to learn for and forget 2 days after you've written it, essentially useless fluff around what I've actually come to study, that being Computer Science.

          2 votes
          1. [5]
            Whom
            Link Parent
            You've used yourself to bring up more things we need to address at a much earlier point than adding classes to university, then: the ideas that politics are separate from science (or that your...

            You've used yourself to bring up more things we need to address at a much earlier point than adding classes to university, then: the ideas that politics are separate from science (or that your actions are somehow apolitical), that a university degree's purpose is to make you really good at only one thing, that ethics and gender studies are "fluff," and beyond all that the superficial way we test for competency in the things that are already required. So there's deep-seated problems as well as the simpler ones that just adding ethics courses helps with.

            You've provided a very good example for why we need much, much more than just ethics courses tacked on at university, thank you.

            9 votes
            1. [4]
              Grzmot
              Link Parent
              Considering I've said that my university most likely added the course because of office politics, it seems rather strange to claim that science and politics are divorced from each other. However,...

              ideas that politics are separate from science (or that your actions are somehow apolitical)

              Considering I've said that my university most likely added the course because of office politics, it seems rather strange to claim that science and politics are divorced from each other. However, the subject of Gender Studies is irrelevant to the major of Computer Science. The way the course was taught makes it obvious that it wasn't added in any thoughtful or relevant way to the major, it was added because someone wanted diversity points.

              that a university degree's purpose is to make you really good at only one thing

              I mean, yes? I'm majoring in Computer Science, not Philosophy or Gender Studies or Physics. The point of university is that you can pick and choose what you're interested in and learn about those things. While there are often prerequisites (such as Algebra and Mathematics in general for Computer Science), I'd rather not have to take courses that have nothing to do with what I'm studying. Most university courses in the technical regions (Physics, Mechatronics, etc.) are pretty hard. They're stressful, they require a lot of work and thought (rightfully so) and it's hard to not get cynical when you're forced to take courses irrelevant to what you're studying, especially if you see yourself doing better thing with the wasted time.

              that ethics and gender studies are "fluff,"

              In the context of a Computer Science degree, yes. I don't care if someone wants to study Philosophy or Gender Studies or both, tha's why universities exist; to give students a deep dive into particular subjects and research those fields. If you go to university studying Gender Studies, they aren't fluff, they're integral to what you're there to do. I wouldn't want a Philosophy student to be forced to take entry-level Algebra, it's irrelevant to their major.

              all that the superficial way we test for competency in the things that are already required.

              I agree with that, I don't think end-term exams are a particularly sound way to test students. This is usually why most courses have a practical part attached to them. So in the end you have both homework and exams.

              So there's deep-seated problems as well as the simpler ones that just adding ethics courses helps with.

              My original point. Forcing students into an Ethics course isn't going to turn the bad apples (i.e those who'd like to write software to let AI undress pictures of women) into good people and if the course is done badly, it will make the rest of the students hostile.

              4 votes
              1. [3]
                Whom
                (edited )
                Link Parent
                By the way, there are typically math, natural science, and other "unrelated" requirements for people in other fields, and I wouldn't have it any other way. One of the major ideas behind these...

                By the way, there are typically math, natural science, and other "unrelated" requirements for people in other fields, and I wouldn't have it any other way. One of the major ideas behind these universities is that being a well-rounded person who understands the world that they're living in makes you better at what you're being trained for as well as everything else, and imo one of their main services to society is taking students who only care about one thing and forcing them into opening their eyes. While there's many flaws along the way, the fact that some people will hyper-focus on their field of choice and ignore anything else is something to try and find a solution to rather than a reason to give up.

                The problems reach much further than university and many even come down to the economic consideration that university is to most working class people where we can't help but consider it as just a path to a job. There's a whole lotta things to fix...but being taught ethics is part of this equation.

                Also, given that in CS you're still likely going to be working with human beings, doing work that impacts human beings, gender studies is very relevant. It doesn't exist in a bubble. Simply put, while one may unfortunately pass the tests and make it through, if they throw out and make a joke of a part of their education like that, they're coming out much less equipped than their peers who do take them seriously. It's a waste of time and money only if that attitude is taken.

                8 votes
                1. [2]
                  Grzmot
                  Link Parent
                  How do ethics fit into "understanding the university isn't all about one subject"? Besides you seem to think that Gender Studies is in any way practically oriented it's teaching when it's all...

                  How do ethics fit into "understanding the university isn't all about one subject"?

                  Besides you seem to think that Gender Studies is in any way practically oriented it's teaching when it's all quotes by dead people about how weird their bodies are (and could be in the future... Spooky). There was no practical information about anything in there. It was all theories and writings by people who had no connection to CS.

                  I would love a comprehensive practical course on ethics, gods know that there are enough examples to work with, the topic of this post being a very good one. The problem is that such things are usually taught by, well, philosophy professors, which usually aren't very hands-on people. On the opposite they're often quite removed from society and applying ethics, not just theorizing about them.

                  1 vote
                  1. Whom
                    Link Parent
                    They don't, accepting the breadth of knowledge and understanding that's available to you beyond your subject plays into properly approaching ethics (or gender studies, etc). My point is that...

                    How do ethics fit into "understanding the university isn't all about one subject"?

                    They don't, accepting the breadth of knowledge and understanding that's available to you beyond your subject plays into properly approaching ethics (or gender studies, etc). My point is that there's a whole lot of things that need to be solved and "people are going to ignore and laugh at stuff like I did" is an argument for going harder at the problem including with ethics courses and such.

                    When it comes to practicality in gender studies and ethics, if you had simply said that they should be taught in practice as well as in theory, I don't think many would disagree with you, short of maybe pointing at some programs that do so. The professors who taught the classes you're talking about probably wouldn't disagree with you, even. However, that doesn't make the things that you did go to useless or anything. Again, it's part of being a well-rounded person because anything you do in the world involves running into the things these equip you to understand and deal with. The abstract things you'll be introduced to are still real, they still exist in the minds of human beings and help us understand those human beings...the world and its inhabitants are complex and we all need to understand them better. Someone isn't an exception to that because they want to focus on computers.

                    Oh and I'd be a little careful if you want to make it almost entirely the practical end of those fields, as much as I think both are needed. When you're teaching theory, you're giving students ideas and methods to work with themselves and teaching them to think these things out on their own. When you're teaching things entirely practically...well, it's a lot more prescriptive and 1000x preachier than theory could ever be. Check out any teacher education program to see that at work! The practical and the abstract are deeply related, it's best to work with both...don't cut yourself off from reality, but also don't be that person throwing away anything that doesn't benefit your career in a direct and obvious way.

                    4 votes
  2. [2]
    MimicSquid
    Link
    The only positive thing I can think of that might come of this is the devaluation and defanging of nudes used to hostile effect. If you can grab the software and churn out a nude version of any...

    The only positive thing I can think of that might come of this is the devaluation and defanging of nudes used to hostile effect. If you can grab the software and churn out a nude version of any photograph, even real ones won't have the same power to harm if spread.

    21 votes
    1. stephen
      Link Parent
      "That's not even real! Fake nudes! Fake nudes!!" I guess it's a double edged sword...

      "That's not even real! Fake nudes! Fake nudes!!" I guess it's a double edged sword...

      11 votes
  3. [11]
    Algernon_Asimov
    (edited )
    Link
    As a gay man with internet access, I know this is bullshit. There are also thousands of images of nude men online, in and out of porn. The reason DeepNude only works on images of women is because...

    DeepNude only works on images of women, Alberto said, because it's easy to find thousands of images of nude women online in porn.

    As a gay man with internet access, I know this is bullshit. There are also thousands of images of nude men online, in and out of porn.

    The reason DeepNude only works on images of women is because "Alberto" is interested in objectifying only women. If someone like me had written this software, it would work on men. This software reflects the "male gaze", so it's sexist.

    "Is this right? Can it hurt someone?" he said he asked himself. "I think that what you can do with DeepNude, you can do it very well with Photoshop (after a few hours of tutorial)," he said.

    He's not wrong. But the fact that it works only on images of women speaks volumes about who is intended to use this software, and why.

    EDIT: Corrected the "wandering 'only'" which caused some misunderstandings, as below.

    17 votes
    1. [10]
      Weldawadyathink
      Link Parent
      I think this situation could use a bit of Occam's razor. I find it much more likely that the creator just did not bother to do the work for males because they were not interested in men. Then,...

      The reason DeepNude only works on images of women is because "Alberto" is only interested in objectifying women.

      I think this situation could use a bit of Occam's razor. I find it much more likely that the creator just did not bother to do the work for males because they were not interested in men. Then, when questioned about that decision, they comes up with that answer. A person who is only into women would reasonably never bother to look for Male nudes online.

      16 votes
      1. [9]
        Algernon_Asimov
        Link Parent
        That's exactly what I said: he's only interested in objectifying women - or, in other words, he's only interested in women as sexual objects.

        I find it much more likely that the creator just did not bother to do the work for males because they were not interested in men.

        That's exactly what I said: he's only interested in objectifying women - or, in other words, he's only interested in women as sexual objects.

        7 votes
        1. [8]
          iiv
          Link Parent
          That does not follow, logically. He could very well be interested in other qualities of women. The reason he isn't objectifying men is presumably because he's heterosexual.

          he's only interested in objectifying women - or, in other words, he's only interested in women as sexual objects.

          That does not follow, logically. He could very well be interested in other qualities of women. The reason he isn't objectifying men is presumably because he's heterosexual.

          12 votes
          1. [7]
            Algernon_Asimov
            Link Parent
            Well... yes. I don't understand why people are debating this point by agreeing with me.

            The reason he isn't objectifying men is presumably because he's heterosexual.

            Well... yes.

            I don't understand why people are debating this point by agreeing with me.

            1 vote
            1. [6]
              iiv
              Link Parent
              The fact that he objectifies women does not mean that he's only interested in women as sexual objects.

              The fact that he objectifies women does not mean that he's only interested in women as sexual objects.

              10 votes
              1. [5]
                Algernon_Asimov
                Link Parent
                Now I get it! This is the "wandering 'only'" problem. A very kind editor I knew via Facebook taught me about this problem some years ago and, since then, I've always taken care to put my "onlys"...

                Now I get it!

                This is the "wandering 'only'" problem. A very kind editor I knew via Facebook taught me about this problem some years ago and, since then, I've always taken care to put my "onlys" (and other adverbs) exactly where they need to be.

                However, when I wrote "'Alberto' is only interested in objectifying women", I decided not to put the "only" in the correct place because it looked too clunky and overly formal - and I figured people would understand what I was saying anyway, because I was using "only" in the common everyday way that most people use it.

                It seems I was wrong.

                The version of the sentence that I decided not to use was "'Alberto' is interested in objectifying only women". That is, he's interested in objectifying women, but not interested in objectifying men.

                I'll be more careful in future. I'll use the more formal placement of "only" instead of the everyday placement.

                FYI: @Weldawadyathink

                15 votes
                1. [2]
                  Amarok
                  Link Parent
                  I find it's good practice to treat any word that ends in 'y' as radioactive when proofreading, and remove them unless they are necessary. Adverbs are the devil. I hadn't run into this particular...

                  I find it's good practice to treat any word that ends in 'y' as radioactive when proofreading, and remove them unless they are necessary. Adverbs are the devil. I hadn't run into this particular issue myself before you linked it, so that was a good read. Thanks!

                  7 votes
                  1. Algernon_Asimov
                    Link Parent
                    I love my adverbs, though. I embrace them. They are a key part of how I write. I'm keeping them. Sorry, not sorry, as the cool kids might say! As for radioactive words that end in "y"... "any",...

                    I love my adverbs, though. I embrace them. They are a key part of how I write. I'm keeping them. Sorry, not sorry, as the cool kids might say!

                    As for radioactive words that end in "y"... "any", "they", "necessary"... I think you meant words that end in "-ly". ;)

                    3 votes
                2. iiv
                  Link Parent
                  Aha, thank you for clarifying.

                  Aha, thank you for clarifying.

                  5 votes
                3. Weldawadyathink
                  Link Parent
                  Wow, that was a fascinating read. Most of the time, when I learn about some new grammatical problem, I already had a sense of the issue and just never had a name to put to it. With the wandering...

                  Wow, that was a fascinating read. Most of the time, when I learn about some new grammatical problem, I already had a sense of the issue and just never had a name to put to it. With the wandering only, I never even realized it could be an issue. I will have to be on the look out for this in the future. Thank you for making me smarter.

                  5 votes
  4. [2]
    alyaza
    Link
    this was a little story over the weekday. VICE first reported on this app that's another bound forward in "technology we are woefully unprepared for" a little over two days ago. their story seems...

    this was a little story over the weekday. VICE first reported on this app that's another bound forward in "technology we are woefully unprepared for" a little over two days ago. their story seems to have done the app in, but i wouldn't be very surprised if someone else remakes it (bigger and better, too) since the cat's well out of the bag now.

    8 votes
    1. Ephemere
      Link Parent
      Yeah, this is profoundly awkward and is likely to be quite hurtful to a number of people, but it seems an inevitable progression from a set of technologies. Argh.

      Yeah, this is profoundly awkward and is likely to be quite hurtful to a number of people, but it seems an inevitable progression from a set of technologies. Argh.

      9 votes
  5. [4]
    Hypersapien
    Link
    What happens if you feed a nude picture into it?

    What happens if you feed a nude picture into it?

    8 votes
    1. [2]
      unknown user
      Link Parent
      What happens if you put a picture of a guy into it? or a picture of something that isn't even human, like a pencil or something.

      What happens if you put a picture of a guy into it?

      or a picture of something that isn't even human, like a pencil or something.

      1 vote
      1. Diff
        Link Parent
        If you feed a picture of a guy into it, it tries to slap pornstar tits on him because that's all it knows how to do. It's a very limited software, trained on a very limited data set, apparently it...

        If you feed a picture of a guy into it, it tries to slap pornstar tits on him because that's all it knows how to do. It's a very limited software, trained on a very limited data set, apparently it can really only handle someone showing some skin facing generally towards the camera.

        Saw a thread where someone fed it a picture of Richard Stallman, was apparently pretty hard to get anything out of it and IIRC he was still wearing his T-Shirt sleeves and the legs on his pants. Basically, it tries to detect a torso and replace it with a pornstar torso. I'd imagine if there is no torso, it'd try to find the most torso-like section of the image.

        6 votes
  6. unknown user
    Link
    Here's a kinda related video on deepfakes by Tom Scott. It raises some interesting points.

    Here's a kinda related video on deepfakes by Tom Scott. It raises some interesting points.

    3 votes