Inside the AI Porn Marketplace Where Everything and Everyone Is for Sale
(www.404media.co)
from tux0r@feddit.de to technology@lemmy.world on 22 Aug 2023 21:11
https://feddit.de/post/2805371
from tux0r@feddit.de to technology@lemmy.world on 22 Aug 2023 21:11
https://feddit.de/post/2805371
Each of these reads like an extremely horny and angry man yelling their basest desires at Pornhub’s search function.
threaded - newest
This is not a troll: zoom in on the feet of the yellow dress image. It’s hilariously bad.
Oh no, the realism, it’s just too much! 🤡
Wait, why did you zoom in on the feet?
I didn’t even realize her feet were in the image
<img alt="" src="https://lemmy.zip/pictrs/image/cf23c1b5-f46f-4e84-aec9-bcf70ee3b28c.webp">
Obligatory “Boulderchuck is a Nazi”
Obligatory “Pebbleyeet is a Nazi”
How many names has stonetoss gone by at this point like what the hell
I’m an elbow man, myself.
You need to check yourself into some fucking rehab or something you filthy degenerate
About these rehabs, would the staff at them happen to have short sleeve shirts that showcase their elbows?
Pffft-- Imagine not being an armpits man!
Thank you. I think it's really weird. nothing wrong with it but it makes me uncomfortable.
Fuck pebblethrow
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
Because the hands were reasonably normal. AI always fucks up one or the other.
Sorry, she appears to have only three fingers and the index is kinda shaped like a thumb?
don't kinkshame me!
She has the correct amount of toes. Whats the problem?
xkcd
I mean technically there are 10 but there’s 6 on 1 foot and 4 on the other.
Let’s not get pedantic here.
technically we’re getting pedfootic
.
Podriatric*
podantic?
And her right foot is on her left leg and her left foot is on her right leg
WOW, try to have some realistic standards buddy.
Knees are also too sharp.
Indeed, there is surely no demand for unrealistic porn.
What's wrong with having six toes on one foot, four toes on the other foot and your feet on backwards?
You underestimate the future growth for amputee fetishes.
You missed the heel she has on the top of the four-toed one, around where her ankle meets. Foot's reversible.
Hot.
Click on comments hoping to find conversations on the ethics of AI porn. Instead find a 20+ comment chain scrutinizing the details of the feet and other features on the thumbnail.
Lemmy becoming Reddit went faster than I had thought.
People are people. Changing infrastructure isn't going to make it different, only the ability to perhaps filter it better.
Oh yeah. At least they got the total amount of toes correct.
I did try out one of those image generators. Wanted a picture of two girls making out in the bathroom. The index finger of one girl was grown together with the collarbone of the other one.
Her left hand is looking kind of messed up also. Only 3 fingers… or maybe more than 3 fingers but only 3 knuckles.
People who are into mutant porn are going to love this. No matter what your prompt is, you’re nearly guaranteed to get some horrendous mutant abomination that could be from The Thing.
Oh man, these guys are gonna get sued to oblivion one day.
Yeah, reminds me of the early days of limewire.
.
Honestly, if the combination of AI porn + good AR + haptic fleshlights gets us to a point where horny single men with limited real-world romantic prospects can have fulfilling sex lives without having to bug any actual living women to attain them, I think the world will be a better place.
The complete opposite is true. That would be a death of dispar filled distopia. Do we not have enough virgins jacking to internet porn all day with crippling depression.
People need relationships not better internet porn
Oh ok, let me just put this genie back in the bottle then…/s
Would men or the 70s traded in their lives for sexbots I wonder
Welp we all know you’re eating steak in the Matrix.
AI porn is interesting for its extreme detail in systems that were not quite designed for it, and what has been achieved with extremely small model sizes. Like a typical chat model of what seems like an equivalent quality as far as accurate detail comprehension is two to three times larger. It is hard to objectively compare these two, but this is my intuitive/highly speculative opinion.
That said, in is hilarious how much some model checkpoints can troll someone. Let’s just say, after my casual experiments to explore how LoRAs and other modifications and enhancements work, there would be many PTSD experiences for anyone that tries this. You might just find yourself reorienting your preferences every time you blink.
Also, if the option is available, you run the serious risk of it becoming an alternative lifestyle, especially amongst those that pursue an academic path and must stay free from distraction. If this is experienced at a younger age, it may remain as a permanent choice. It objectifies relationships and that may prove difficult to change.
I think you will find the only barrier to relationships is really the person in question’s state of mind and willingness to put in effort. If a skateboard has aspirations to board a hundred million dollar super yacht, that’s a mental health issue. However, outside of mismanaged birth policies where the sexes are disproportionately represented, I’m a strong believer that there is a skateboard for every skateboard, and at least a dock and dingy for every super yacht.
Because what the world needs now is an even more disengaged, disinterested, and misanthropic portion of the population.
Why learn to fuck people when you can just buy The Wanker 9000™?
.
Better wait for the 9001, you don’t want to be a first adopter on this sort of thing.
Instructions unclear, dick stuck in toaster.
Send help.
Just flip the switch
“We’re sorry to announce a product recall due to a low to moderate chance of your device performing an unexpected castration.”
Yeah let’s just give young men sex robots and make them even more detached from community and relationships
I do kind of wonder what the end-game is in terms of fertility rates in society if we can manufacture ever-more-perfect simulations of sex.
The Amish might still be around, but...
Meh. If someone wants to opt out they pretty much are going to do it. Besides would you rather deal with them? Imagine if everyone you were around didn’t have a means to entertain themselves at all times. They would be engaged, they would create drama, they would tell other people what they thought of them.
Sometimes in industrial equipment we put in random alarms to be triggered so the people who are supposed to stand there have to do something vs wandering around causing trouble. Especially in union plants.
Well, to rule out the “misanthropic” part one doesn’t really need to have a fulfilling sex life, just meet a few people (suppose, women) who’d make them like humanity again.
About disengaged and disinterested - it’s more about engagement and interest being hard.
These men used to gather on the streets and start breaking shit and kicking grannies back in the day to express their frustration. Them withdrawing to their moms basements smoking weed and jerking off to porn might not be ideal but perhaps not the worst thing either. That’s why we don’t see a significant uptick in crime despite the ever increasing amount of such men.
Ahhh, you watched the Red Dwarf episode “Better than Life”
Yeah, but with the caveat that this will only make the world a better place if society chose to implicitly allow this, and actively chose not to disparage, mock, and exclude those people who want to go this path. Which, based on everything we've ever seen about society, is not going to happen.
True, but people already do 80% of that - I don't think the stigma attached to "AI-generated porn that talks to you and responds to your requests" is likely to be meaningfully greater than the stigma attached to regular porn, or to an OnlyFans where you're doing the same thing with an actual woman but clamoring for her attention with a bunch of other guys.
Uh, based on the realistic fuck robots that are hitting the market I don’t think you have to worry about society telling you that you can’t have VR sex with a giant hentai squid with massive tits. Just maybe don’t do it in your parents living room this time.
I mean… its not like masturbation isnt already mocked and shamed already around the world, its not like thats ever stoped the more perverted ones that have weird kinks. And even if theres legislations against it (which there hasnt been any serious one afak since the middle ages) the wankers are always gonna win, probably because they have more stamina.
Edit: now im not saying they should be legislated, imho the government has no bussines on ones sex life as long as all parts involved are concenting adults or being solo, just that they always have and probably will be shamed, why? I dont know, but probably religion has something to do there. I wont judge anybody though.
I’m not sure “pervert” is the best word to describe someone who masturbates.
True, but my scope was more focused to someone thats gonna treat themselves to a vr suported oppaibot2100, with many features including blah blah blah. You get the drill, the opaibot is getting a diferent drill in another way though.
Is it, feels like Gen X and Millenials were fairly sex positive generations that quite happily talked about things like that and porn. Gen Z seem to be scarily sex-negative again, see all their complaints about sex scenes in films as an example.
I said around the world. First world countries thend to be more outgoing with sex discucion (not necesarilly thr same as education) than other countries that in the most part, or at least on the rulling classes, thend to be more traditional. Althought about the whole gen z and gen x thing, this is the first time i heard of that, could you elaborate on that m8?
newsweek.com/gen-z-distate-hollywood-sex-scenes-s…
Theres been a lot of chatter about the sex and nudity in Oppenheimer recently and whether it was “necessary for the plot” which it clearly was as those scenes are packed with character building.
I don’t keep up on zoomerisms, is this really a thing? I thought zoomers were basically the OnlyFans generation.
newsweek.com/gen-z-distate-hollywood-sex-scenes-s…
This entire sentence is it’s own reflective meme.
Yeah sure Gen Z is all sex-negatice when they grow up and all they ever hear (from teachers, moral authorities etc…) is how egoistic they are for desiring sex. What child in a sane mind is willing to effort so much energy just to overcome the needless and worthless obstacle that is general morality to have sex with someone?
Is that what they’re being told? Doesn’t seem like it would be when their teachers, parents, etc will be from sex positive generations?
My experience at least.
The birth rate is low enough already
Except instead they will treat ai girls as filthy as they want and then expect all women to act like that. Then not understand why they don’t… yeah pretty sure that’s what’s going to happen.
Yeah, it’s a great idea, if these people don’t, like, interact with the world writ large
Just like video games taught me to shoot everything
No it’s much more like the way porn already messes up a lot of men’s perception of women and sex
As disney and romantic movies did with womens idea of relationships
How does AI impact this anymore than real girls? If anything it could cut down on sex trafficking.
I’d push back on that and say that’s fear mongering. The scenario you’re describing MAY occur IF “they” don’t witness social interactions with IRL girls at all, and that includes video/virtual meetups, video recordings of IRL girls interacting etc.
“They” would have to have never seen a female person in any media other than their AI sexbots, which I find incredibly unlikely that this could become the norm.
Makes sense. I grew up playing videogames where I would shot stuff that was in my way. That is why in real life I use a gun to get thru traffic. I also played a game for a while where I rode on the back of a lizard and ate mushrooms to grow larger. Which is pretty much my typical weekday.
For you see I have not hit the level of mental development of most 3 year olds and can not separate our playtime from the real world. Just like the hypothetical people in your example.
Now if you excuse me I plan to make bricks vanish by arranging them in a straight line wall-to-wall in my house.
The human reproductive rate will plummet once we can have VR with sensory input.
Future Sex is a great anthology series about it.
That's science fiction.
More for us then boys
You would have been into eugenics in the 1930s
The psychological ramifications of that are immense. It would destroy people. It would be no different than any other drug.
lemmy coomers will never concede this obvious point
Maybe because some of us don’t think something should be forbidden for “being like a drug”.
Governments trying to control the private lives of adults never ends well.
I’d argue but I’m too busy cooming
I don’t see how. It is just porn but more specific. You could get the same results before this but with a tiny bit more work. It should have as much impact on humanity as did on-demand streaming did. On the individual level this could maybe put an end to all the not-so-ethically produced porn.
lmao that is not fulfilling
Some might think so.
I remember a guy on reddit a few years ago arguing vehemently that their hand was better than an actual living woman’s vagina, to say nothing of a Fleshlight.
The denial was strong in that individual’s case, but if enough incels are already in that deep it’s probably gonna be enough for many of them.
I’ll just leave this here:
Automatic1111, depthmap script, image to image, click Left-right stereogram for vr or red-blue if you have old 3d glasses.
How good is the stereoscopic 3d image generation? Do you have some example SFW stereogram images produced with this process?
github.com/…/stable-diffusion-webui-depthmap-scri…
They are pretty good. Just don’t crank the 3D up to max, as it doesn’t know what is behind things in 2D images.
<img alt="One of my examples" src="https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/7d0731dc-4c9a-4d81-93ff-69a6d7374ead.png">
Wow they are pretty good! Thanks!
That was pretty good just by unfocusing my eyes like I do for Magic Eye posters.
So I checked and nobody has put AI porn of me up for sale, yet. What the fuck, guys? Am I not desirable enough for you!?
We’re saving the best until last.
I’m unconvinced by this attempt to create a moral panic. IMO nothing here is shocking or offensive once I remember that people could already use their imaginations to picture celebrities naked.
it's not like celeb porn fakes are anything new, anyway.
Like I’ve been saying for years, AI doesn’t need to be sentient to royally fuck society. Just needs to be good enough to mimic you and ruin your life or take your job.
AI can have my job. It’s eyes will hurt within a week and it will be taking mental health days.
I’d love to give AI my job, but then I’d be homeless.
I should clarify that I’m not against AI as a technology. I’m against it making me poor
.
I mean, realistically, I do expect someone to put together a viable robotic house-construction robot at some point.
https://www.homelight.com/blog/buyer-how-much-does-it-cost-to-build-a-house/
Also, I'd bet that it cuts into materials cost, because you don't need to provide the material in a form convenient for a human to handle.
I've seen people creating habitations with large-scale 3d printers, but that's not really a practical solution. It's just mechanically-simple, so easier to make the robot.
I don't know if it needs to use what we'd think of as AI today to do that. Maybe it will, if that's a way to solve some problems conveniently. But I do think that automating house construction will happen at some point in time.
The unemployment line there makes for quite the mental image.
Listen it’s a niche market
Ethics of AI porn aside, can we talk about the Pornhub search function and how shit it is?
.
Arguably a good application for AI image-to-prompt functionality, I suppose.
It’s like everyone types with one hand on that website
The trick is finding your preferred channels and just browsing those. I have a handful of channels I will happily browse for myself and a couple of channels for me and my wife to browse together.
Searching hasn’t really been worth anything for quite a while. I’m more likely to find something I like by clicking a previous video that was enjoyed and scrolling through the related ones.
I do something similar. When I find a video I like I browse the playlists.
There is so much wrong with just the title of this article:
Get the fuck outta here! This two bit blog want to call itself “a 404 Media investigation”? Maybe don’t tackle subjects you have no knowledge or expertise in.
Repeat: FOR FREE! No product!
Have you seen Danbooru? Or F95 Zone? This shit is out there, everywhere. Rule 34 has existed for decades. So has the literal site called “Rule 34”. You remember that whole Tifa porn video that showed up in an Italian court room? Somebody had to animate that. 3D porn artists takes its donations from Patreon. Are you going to go after Patreon, too?
These dumbasses are describing things like they’ve been living in a rock for the past 25 years, watching cable TV with no Internet access, just NOW discovered AI porn as their first vice, and decided to write an article about it to get rid of the undeserved guilt of what they found.
What a shitty, pathetic attempt at creating some sort of moral panic.
I’m guessing that the “marketplace” and “sale” refers to sites like “Mage Space” which charge money per image generated or offer subscriptions. The article mentions that the model trainers also received a percentage of earnings off of the paid renderings using their models.
Obviously you could run these models on your own, but my guess is that the crux of the article is about monetizing the work, rather than just training your own models and sharing the checkpoints.
The article is somewhat interesting as it covers the topic from an outsider’s perspective more geared towards how monetization infests open sharing, but yeah the headline is kinda clickbait.
Well, instead of bitching about the AI porn aspect, perhaps they should spend more time talking about how much of a scam it is to charge for AI-generated images.
Compute costs money, it’s more ethical to charge your users than it is to throw shady ads at them which link to malware.
I took their comment to mean running the generation locally is almost free.
Sure, if you have hardware and/or time to generate it client side. I’m just saying that if you run a web service and decide to charge for it, that’s better than most of the alternative monetization strategies.
Also buying and eventually replacing expensive hardware. Running AI at scale requires hundreds of thousands of dollars of infrastructure.
I get no malware or shady ads when I generate AI images with Stable Diffusion. I don’t know what kind of sites or tools you’re using where you’re getting shady ads, but you’re getting ripped off.
Just because something is free it does not mean that there is no marketplace or product. Sozial Media is generally free, but I would still call Facebook, Tiktok or Instagram a product.
Nowadays a lot of industries start out completely free, but move into paid subscription models later.
.
Okay. There is still no product involved with AI porn.
People buy and sell paintings despite the fact that you could also make paintings pretty easily. You’re paying for the time they spent creating it and the expertise it required. Just because some people scan and upload their paintings for free, doesn’t mean that all paintings are not products. I don’t see why the same couldn’t be true for AI porn.
???
You pay in giving up your free time which they sell. Technically we’re just working for free and the product is our attention
Well, fuck, I better log off of Lemmy because it costs me too much damn money.
The danbooru aspect of the “AI” moral panic is what annoys me.
So many of my friends - many of whom are amateur artists - hate computer generated images because the copyright of the artists were violated, and they weren’t even asked. And I agree that does kinda suck - but - how did that happen?
Danbooru.
The art had already been “stolen” and was available online for free. Where was their morality then? For the last decade or whatever that danbooru has been up? Danbooru is who violated the copyright, not stable diffusion or whatever.
At least computer generated imagery is different, like, the stuff it was trained on was exactly their art, while this stuff, while might look like theirs, is unique. (And often with a unique number of fingers.)
And, if “copyright” is their real concern, them surely they understand that copyright only protects against someone making a profit of their work, right? Surely they’ll have looked into it and they already know that “art” made by models that used copyrighted content for training are provided from being copyrighted themselves, right? And that you can only buy/sell content made from models that are in the copyright clear, surely they know all this?
No, of course not. They don’t give a shit about copyright, they just got the ickies from new tech.
no one is moral panicking over ai. people just want control over their creation, whether it’s profit sharing or not being used to train models.
you really can’t see how an imageboard has completely different considerations over image generating models?
or that people are going after ai because there is only like a couple of models that everyone uses vs uncountable image hosts?
both danbooru and stable diffusion could violate copyright, not one or the other.
why would someone want training models to ingest their creation just to spit out free forgeries that they cannot claim the copyright to?
Yeah. It’s pretty iffy to go “well, these other guys violated copyright so they might as well take it” as if once violated it’s all over and nobody else is liable.
This is a bad faith reading. The argument isn’t that “someone else did it first” - the argument is that the concern over copyright is suspiciously sudden. No one has gotten mad about danbooru - or Reddit, or Facebook, or any of the other billions of sites that use content created by others to draw users and make a profit from ad revenue. Why are people mad about some neckbeard’s $3/month patreon based on an unoriginal art style, but not about Facebook (etc) destroying the entire thing that used to be called journalism? Danbooru literally stole the work, why is no one mad about that? Why are they only mad when someone figuratively steals the work?
AI art has a similar potential to do to set what Facebook did to journalism - I just wrote a long post about it in another reply in this thread so I won’t repeat it all here - but, wealthy corporations will be able to use AI art to destroy the career of being an artist. That’s what’s dangerous about AI.
No, what is bad faith is to dismiss the valid concerns of artists just because there is a different issue that they have to deal with also.
Many of these artists already struggle with unauthorized sharing of their works. Some go through great lengths to try to take down their works from image boards, others simply accept it as being a reality of the internet. The thing is, even those who accept unauthorized sharing of their works, do so in hopes that their official profiles will be linked back and they might still benefit from it through their shops, crowdfunding or commissions. Something that is very much not a thing with AI, because AI does not credit or link back to the works that were used to train it, even when it accepts prompts to directly imitate their style. I understand that this is due to how AI works, that ultimately it doesn’t keep the works themselves… but for the artists that makes no difference. To them, all that matters is that people copied their works to get similar artworks for free, without asking their permission or offering any compensation. That they are losing customers and work opportunities to something that relied on their work to function to begin with.
Pointing fingers at Danbooru not only glosses over many particularities of the matter, but it’s a low effort attempt to call artists hypocrites and disregard their concerns. But who said they aren’t mad about Danbooru? AI using it for training is itself a whole series of new violations that only compound to it. One thing does not excuse the other, much on the contrary.
And if you want to talk about journalism, there definitely is a lot to discuss there, but that’s not the topic here.
First off, I’m going to stop writing out “computer generated imagery” and start saying CGI, please understand I mean this kind of AI art we’re taking about, not avengers movies special effects.i know it’s already a taken acronym but I hate calling it AI, so, until we come up with something better…
A big part of what I’m saying is that the CGI issue is just this, but weirder. And I’m not saying it’s not weird - it definitely is - but this particular concern, to me, seems disingenuous because of the above quote. All CGI does is change some of the venues people in group A scour.
Regarding credit - this is kind of sticky. There are two (well, more than 2, but 2 relevant here) parts of IP law: copyright and license.
Copyright is a default, you-don’t-have-to-do-anything protection against people profiting off of your work. I right click/save your photo, I put it on my site and sell copies for $50. This is legally actionable. It’s not criminal - but it’s actionable. Profit is a requirement here; if I share your work with my friend - or even post it on my non-monetized website - there’s not really anything you can do. I can even tell everyone it’s mine - copyright law does not care. You would have to be able to prove that I’m profiting somehow or else I’ll be able to use a fair use defense. (And it will be a legitimate use of fair use.)
License law governs our ability to allow people to use our work. Legally, we’re allowed to write contracts and have others sign them which outline parameters of permission. These are legally actionable - but only if the other party signs. Most of what we see in terms of DMCA takedowns is people who are profiting off the work; the copyright owner basically says, take my shit down, or but a license for $x. Both parties need to agree to a licensing agreement - but, again, most of the time, it’s not really optional, because the person is infringing on the copyright.
If the person isn’t infringing on copyright, they don’t have to do anything. This is what fair use is for: we all have the right to learn and grow and share from each other’s work - with the exception that, if your try to make money off it, that’s not going to fly.
So, unless there’s copyright infringement, an artist has to right to demand a name check or a link back. I mean, you can ask, but I can just say no.
Profit is vital here - if a person isn’t making money off their CGI, legally, they’re in the clear.
But the thing is, the models one uses to create CGI with stable diffusion or whatever, they have their own licenses - the kind that are like terms of service. “You can use this, but by doing so you’re agreeing to the license terms.” And models that have been trained on “illegitimate” content have licenses that bar the user from (directly) profiting from the work.
(This is why patreon is the main source of income for infringers - and patreon shuts them down if you complain, even without any legal documentation. But, again, I feel this community is microscopic. Sure, it’s sketchy and shitty, but it’s on such a minute scale compared to other infringements.)
So, if you really think that the very few people who are making $5/month are a bigger issue than the film industry legally using “free” CGI to suppress artist wages, then I really feel like your priorities are misaligned.
I definitely don’t mean that artists are hypocrites. Artists just want to do their thing and get credit and maybe even money. They’re the victims - regardless of whether I’m right or type right, in either case, artists are the victims. Tho tbh I’m lowkey offended at your implication that only an artist should be concerned about artists losing revenue via CGI. And, also, I’m not saying “danbooru did it first” and wagging my finger at you for not breaking their door down.
I’m saying that the reason the art was used to train these models is because it was on danbooru. Or Reddit, or imgur, or whatever.
(I think danbooru is actually as much a software company as a image site? So I’m not even sure if they’re the right name to use. I always use their name because Stable Diffusion uses their tag system, but idk if that’s fair.)
Blaming Stable Diffusion for danbooru’s infringement is sideways. Like, imagine I plugged the power in my house to piggyback off of yours. Then my friend comes over and plugs his gaming rig in and draws a shit ton of power. Are you going to be mad at him, or me?
Regarding journalism - what I meant by th
First of all, copyright infringement is not a wire that when you cut off one side the other one is also unplugged. When you take down one infringer, every other one that took it from them is still up. C&D’ing Danbooru is not going to take their works off AI models.
Secondly, the easy answer here is both. I don’t see why you think “your friend” gets to get away scot-free. They are mooching just the same and you think they gotta get a free pass? Did you read what I said about linking? Even in your analogy, maybe I already complained to you, maybe I agreed to let you use it if you hand out my business cards, but then comes your friend offering my power cord along with Steve and Mary’s to the whole neighboorhood and not even telling where he got that.
Also, no, profiting is not required for it to be a copyright violation liable to pursuing. The rights owners can take down any work that is not licensed by them. Generally they only don’t bother because having an eternal whack-a-mole with the internet is expensive and tiresome. But that doesn’t mean it’s fair use. Fair use has specific requirements.
No idea why you think this is just about $5 patreons though. Seems like most of the major models have been trained on copyrighted works without authorization.
.
This is one of the most inaccurate statements I’ve seen in 2023.
Everybody is morally panicking over AI.
Or they don’t, because Stable Diffusion is a 4GB file of weights and numbers that have little to do with the content it was trained on. And, you can’t copyright a style.
Of course I see the difference - direct, outright theft and direct profiting from the theft is much worse then using content that’s been stolen to train computer image generation software.
If your complaint is about the copyright infringement, then danbooru should be the target of your complaint - but no one seems to care about that. Why don’t people care about that?
If the concern is that this software makes it easier to commit crimes, sure, I guess? But, again, danbooru. And like every other site on the internet.
The concern, it seems to me, is with person A being an artist, person B makes art and tries to pass it off as an original work by person A. And that’s valid - but I still don’t feel like it’s worse than actually just taking the artwork and calling it “content” and using it to generate as revenue.
The main problem i have with this criticism is that (imo) there are much more important issues at stake with midjourney or whatever - and this (alleged) concern (alleged because it only seems to go skin-deep) prevents people from caring about the real issues.
Many many many jobs now, when a person leaves, they’re replaced with 2 part time people. This benefits profits and hurts everyone else.
The issue with computer generated images is that, when a movie studio needs a sci fi background, it used to require an artist; now, it just requires midjourney - and you can hire the artist for 4 hours (instead of 4 days) to touch it up, fix the fingers, etc - which not only takes less time, but also less talent, which increases the labor supply, which pushes wages down.
This technology has the potential to take the career of being an artist and turns out into a low-wage, part time thing that you can’t live off of. This has happened in so many parts of our economy and it’s really bad, and we need to protect artists from that fate.
So no, I really can’t muster up giving a shit about whether someone on pixiv copies your art and makes 3$ a month from a patreon. The entire field of visual arts is under threat of complete annihilation from greedy capitalists. They’re the villains here, not some neckbeard’s patreon.
I just wanted to say I love your comment. Your totally correct and I enjoyed the passion in your words. That’s how we got to deal with shit article more often. Thx
A lot of the stuff you talked about is covered in the article.
Yep
I mean that’s kind of worse though isn’t it? The point I got from this is that people can make porn of celebs, exes, colleagues, whoever, super easy now. Whether you gotta pay or not is beside the point. Maybe I’m misunderstanding the situation and your point though?
So I can, but I could also do that without AI. People have photoshopped celebrities heads onto porn actors bodies for decades. It doesn’t happen as much now because there’s no point.
Realistically, what is really changed except for the tools?
Simplicity, barriers of entry, skill requirements? Kinda different to just enter a prompt “such and such actress choking on a dildo” than to photoshop it isn’t it? I for one don’t know how to do one but could probably figure out the other.
Again I’m just speculating, I don’t really know.
This is absolutely accurate. Basically humanity is constantly reducing the cost and skill barriers for tasks and jobs. It’s weird that we are now aggressively doing it on creative aspects but that’s what has been done and it’s making a mess of garbage media and porn that could have happened before but much higher quantities and less oversight/Input from multiple people.
So there’s a porn segment I’ve completely overlooked? Unbelievable.
There’s plenty of threads on /b/ with them.
What color goat are you looking for?
Maybe we do live in the best possible world. Wow wouldn’t it be great to get rid of this industry so you can consume porn while knowing that there is zero percent chance this wasn’t made without their consent?
hmmm sweetie but what about the only fans prostitutes? Racist much?
You do know how LLM are trained right?
.
No so go ahead
Are you actually asking?
The jist is that LLM find similar “chunks” out content from their training set, and assemble a response based on this similarity score (similar to your prompt request).
They know nothing they haven’t seen before, and the nicely of them is they create new things from parts of their training data.
Obviously they are very impressive tools but the concern is you can easily take a model that’s designed for porn, feed it pictures of someone you want to shame, and have it generate lifelike porn of a non porn actor.
That, and the line around “ethical” AI porn is blurry.
Strictly speaking, you arguably don't either. Your knowledge of the world is based on your past experiences.
You do have more-sophisticated models than current generative AIs do, though, to construct things out of aspects of the world that you have experienced before.
The current crop are effectively more-sophisticated than simply pasting together content -- try making an image and then adding "blue hair" or something, and you can get the same hair, but recolored. And they ability to replicate artistic styles is based on commonalities in seen works, but you don't wind up seeing chunks of material just done by that artist.
Like, you have a concept of relative characteristics, and the current generative AIs do not. You can tell a human artist "make those breasts bigger", and they can extrapolate from a model built on things they've seen before. The current crop of generative AIs cannot. But I expect that the first bigger-breast generative AI is going to attract users, based on a lot of what generative AIs are being used for now.
There is also, as I understand it, some understanding of depth in images in some existing systems, but the current generative AIs don't have a full 3d model of what they are rendering.
But they'll get more-sophisticated.
I would imagine that there will be a combination of techniques. LLMs may be used, but I doubt that they will be pure LLMs.
I just retained an LLM on your comment you put on the public internet. You feel violated enough to equate it to physical violation?
How would you respond to photo realistic porn that looks like your mother, daughter, [insert person you care about here] especially if they found it distressing?
How would you feel if it was posted on facebook? How would you feel if they had to deal with it at work? From coworkers? From clients?
We are entering uncharted waters. You know why this is different than training a model on text, and your reply to @GBU_28@lemm.ee is hostile and doesn’t acknowledge why people would be upset about AI porn featuring their likeness.
you are answering a question with a different question. LLMs don’t make pictures of your mom. And this particular question?. One that has roughly existed since Photoshop existed.
It just gets easier every year. It was already easy. You could already pay someone 15 bucks on Fiver to do all of that, for years now.
Nothing really new here.
The technology is also easy. Matrix math. About as easy to ban as mp3 downloads. Never stopped anyone. It’s progress. You are a medieval knight asking to put gunpowder back into the box, but it’s clear it cannot be put back - it is already illegal to make non consensual imagery just as it is illegal to copy books. And yet printers exist and photocopiers exist.
Let me be very clear - accepting the reality that the technology is out there, it’s basic, easy to replicate and on a million computers now is not disrespectful to victims of no consensual imagery.
You may not want to hear it, but just like with encryption, the only other choice society has is full surveillance of every computer to prevent people from doing “bad things”. everything you complain about is already illegal and has already been possible - it just gets cheaper every year. What you want to have protection from is technological progress because society sucks at dealing with the consequences of it.
To be perfectly blunt, you don’t need to train any generative AI model for powerful deepfakes. You can use technology like Roop and Controlnet to synthesize any face on any image from a singe photograph. Training not necessary.
When you look at it that way, what point is there to try to legislate training with these arguments? None.
I’m not making an argument to ban it. I’m just pointing out you’re pretending a model from text someone wrote is similar to a model that makes nonconcentual porn.
I don’t think it can be banned, it’s just something they will need to encorperate into revenge porn laws, if it isn’t already covered.
I’m just pointing out your comment sucked.
It’s already covered under those laws. So what are you doing that’s different from ChatGPT hallucinating here ?
Those laws don’t spell out the tools (photoshop); they hinge on reproducing likeness.
Oh good, someone who has read every revenge porn law, ever. I’m glad they work exactly the same, in every nation and state.
Anyway, I must be hallucinating, true, because it seems you keep attacking what I’m saying, instead of defending the comment you made earlier that I took issue with, the one that points out you’re being needlessly hostile.
I can do this right now with photoshop dude what are you talking about. This just points to the need for more revenge porn laws.
We don’t have to sit in the fire when we can crawl out. Are we still on fire? Yeah. Can we do something about that? Yeah!
It seems like so many people these days want perfect solutions but the reality is that sometimes we have to make incremental solutions to erase the problem as much as we can.
And incidentally, this need for revenge porn laws is also a symptomatic issue with a separate cause. Technology always moved forward and with no relation to social advancement, where there is also no realistic “Genie being forced back in the bottle” scenario either.
That being said, easier access to more powerful technology with lackluster recognition of personal responsibility doesn’t exactly bring happy prospects. lol…
Agreed, personal responsibility went out the window a long time ago. Apathy reigns supreme.
I wouldn’t be happy about it but me not being happy about something doesn’t mean I just get an override.
I think the boat has sailed a bit on this one. You can’t really copyright your own image and even if you were some famous person who is willing to do this and fight the legal battles you still have to go up against the fact that no one is making money off of it. You might be able to get a news source to take down that picture of you but it is another thing to make it so the camera company can’t even record you.
But hey I was saying for years that we need to change the laws forbidding photography of people and property without consent and everyone yelled at me that they have the right to use a telescoping lense to view whomever they wanted blocks away.
The creeps have inherited the earth.
Revenge porn/blackmail/exploitation will hopefully become much less obscene, not to the “let’s not prosecute this” levels, but maybe people can stop living in fear of their lives being ruined by malicious actors (unless that’s your kink, you do you).
It will take/drive/demand a massive cultural shift, but if you asked me which world I would rather live in, and the options are one where people are abused and exploited, or one where people can visualize their perversions more easily (but content creators have a harder time making a living) I’ll take the second. Though I may have straw-manned a bit, it’s not something I’ve thought of outside of this forum thread.
Why would I? Folks who have had real nudes of them posted on the Internet haven’t felt “physical violation” but they’ve certainly been violated.
If you had photos of me and trained a porn generating LLM on my photos and shared porn of me, in an identifiable way, I would consider that violation.
But simply taking my words in that simple sentence isn’t identifiable, unique, or revealing. So no.
Further, the original point was about the ethics of AI porn. You can’t get something from nothing.
Ah yes, the porn industry. Paragon of morality and respect.
Isn’t the main problem with those models how you can create porn of everyone without their consent with those tools, too?
Sex trafficking vs virtual photoshop of your face…
Nothing new, and it’s a huge improvement over the current status quo. Not everything needs to be a perfect solution
.
Yeah so what. It’s not as if somebody is “sold on the market” because there’s a nude picture of them. Photoshop is not a real threat to society. We gotta stop making moral imaginations more important than physical things.
.
What the fuck!?
Welcome to the internet
Have a look around
Anything that brain of yours can think of can be found
spoiler
>!Literally in this instance!<
We’ve got mountains of content, some better, some worse
None of this interests me…
You’d be the first
… where all monumental advances in technology are immediately sexualized and used for getting laid or viewing porn.
Sexualizing everything is as old as time
God damn is there a lot of incel vibes in these comments.
Clutch your pearls harder, Puritan. Stay on fb if you fear seeing ankles.
Lol, I’m a fucking atheist ya weirdo
Lol
And yet you think porn is unethical which is a weird-ass puritan take
I don’t think porn is unethical. I was extending the logic of a post someone made.
I do, however, think making fake porn of a celebrity and plastering it all over on the Internet requires, at very least, a lot of moral flexibility.
that's a weird way to spell "bankruptcy"
Difference between ankles and women with 40 foot weenies with massive nutsacks attached to it
That’s not so much the problem as much as not supporting the real providers of pictures of women with 40 foot weenies with massive nutsacks, or everyone seeing your face plastered on that.
Some people here are just way too defensive over this.
Defensive over what?
Thanks for the links 404!
.
Who the fuck is buying this lol, also it’s considered public domain.
The problem with Public Domain is that it does not exist in most jurisdictions. There is no “Public Domain” in (edit: at least parts of) the EU, for example.
Public domain absolutely exists in the EU.
What you mean is that someone can’t passively waive their rights in (most parts of) the EU. When copyright expires, the work is pretty public domain. And the EU recognises public domain from other jurisdiction. It also perfectly allows someone to license a work however they like, while retaining that copyright. Regardless of how a creator allows a work to be used, the work is still their work.
AI bots never had rights to waive. Their work is not their work.
This is only partially true. In the US (which tends to set the tone on copyright, but other jurisdictions will weigh in over time) generative AI cannot be considered an “author.” That doesn’t mean that other forms of rights don’t apply to AI generated works (for example, AI generated works may be treated as trade secrets and probably will be accepted for trademark purposes).
Also, all of the usual transformations which can take work from the public domain and result in a new copyrightable derivative also apply.
This is a much more complex issue than just, “AI bots never had rights to waive.”
What do you mean? Anything that isn’t copyrighted is public domain, including old works.
In some countries, that might be the case. However, in Germany (where I live), there is no way to have something “not copyrighted”. The author holds the copyright unless explicitly licensed. (Here’s where the CC0 comes in handy, but the CC licenses weren’t made for software…)
Our § 29 UrhG explicitly denies the possibility to give up your copyright before your death. Austria has similar laws. So no, nothing is “public domain” in Germany.
(edit:) See also this discussion on Hacker News for broader details.
They’re also creating a lot of images of maid uniforms wearing human faces making ahegao faces while standing on massive erect penis legs.
They post the eight images that wasn’t some body horror fever dream.
There’s a lot of human work that goes into (and has gone into) AI art generation. It’s just very obscured with just the final product.
Remember creepy people use AI. That’s also why a lot of AI stuff is or seems creepy.
Finally there is porn for me
I’m glad you finally found ✨️representation✨️
You could turn these horrors into NFTs and call them coomer coins
Bravo
<img alt="" src="https://files.catbox.moe/gwjme8.gif">
I am so curious as to the origin and context of this gif…
Here ya go: youtu.be/qKCT6OOQuCA?si=aUWUZBlUlGkB-G0q
Here is an alternative Piped link(s): piped.video/qKCT6OOQuCA?si=aUWUZBlUlGkB-G0q
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source, check me out at GitHub.
Wow he’s really shaking the flag right out in public?
Ha, the image description just says “An AI-generated woman found on CivitAI” even though that’s clearly the character Power from Chainsaw Man.
It’s clearly Barack Obama from the classical motion picture, Sharknado 4.
It’s like we’re looking at two completely different images.
Brb, firing up stable diffusion and at least 4 LORAs
Ah, a horse collector.
There is porn on the internet! Give them the Pulitzer Prize! Nice research. You can order these on Fiverr and they do not even have NSFW filters.