Personalized Fake Porn Now For Sale On Reddit

rgMekanic

[H]ard|News
Joined
May 13, 2013
Messages
6,943
The Reddit community deepfakes" which has been creating fake porn videos of celebrities using machine learning is now letter you make custom requests for a donation of bitcoin. While the legality of what they were doing was questionable at best, bringing commercial use into the mix could very well open them up to some serious copyright lawsuits, from both the adult actress/actor whose video is being used, and the celebrity whose likeness is being used.

We covered this back in December when it was first being talked about, but now it seems instead of it being a "hobby" as they were framing it as, trying to profit from someone elses work and likeness could get them into some hot astroglide.

Deepfake makers' creations infringe on both the copyrights of the porn performers, and the celebrities whose faces are taken from interviews or copyrighted publicity photographs. Duan told me that in cases of copyright violation, one of the best ways to prove wrongdoing is through financial payment processors, such as credit card companies or banks. “Financial institutions are generally single points of failure for people trying to hide improper activity,” he said.
 
Deepfakes which are done well are very fappable. As the technology progresses I hope to see its use in a wider range of scenarios, and by that I mean not just porn.
 
Cnbw12V.jpg
 
But Crypto currencies primary purpose is for good right? /sarcasm
 
cue Trump denouncing his newly released (vomitfest) sextape with Stormy Daniels as 'Fake Porn' in 3...... 2........ 1........
 
Good old Reddit admins, I suppose they think the incoming publicity will be good for numbers.
 
Hopefully, these people have values and set limits to this. Would be pretty easy to create child pornography with it, which would then be a legal grey area since its fake. Plus the effects of it are still in question, what little studies were allowed to be conducted with those with the condition are split 50/50 on whether child pornography stops child abuse, or just makes them want the real thing.
 
People have been doing this with still images since at least the 90's with laughable results. Maybe 5% if that takes more than a couple seconds to recognize as an altered image.
 
Not that I look at these kinds of things, but when I looked at these kinds of things the effect was unrealistic and unnerving. I thought the uncanny valley of dead celebs in movies was bad. This was worse, I think the tech has a ways to go.
 
People have been doing this with still images since at least the 90's with laughable results. Maybe 5% if that takes more than a couple seconds to recognize as an altered image.
Not that I look at these kinds of things, but when I looked at these kinds of things the effect was unrealistic and unnerving. I thought the uncanny valley of dead celebs in movies was bad. This was worse, I think the tech has a ways to go.

You actually both touching on another topic that has become a serious issue in video game development and cgi. There's a certain level of detail you can achieve when trying to render something as a perfect human copy remade digitally that just doesn't click in the human brain. For some reason we are subconsciously programmed to instantly know that we are being deceived and that the visual is just a little bit off, even if it's astonishingly close. In the case of these deepfakes, they're not quite that believable, but it still rends that inner nerve screaming out to you that it's not real. Now if the image was modified to look like a lower quality bitrate video, with some blocking and artifacts, then you might be a little more hard pressed to see a difference. In terms of humiliating someone, that type of level is probably achievable by a really well done deepfake. However to make the world think that donald trump made a sex tape with vladamir putin, in russia, not so long ago, we have a long way to go.

As far as a novelty, this is just the next logical step evolution wise from your 4chan /r type xrays and shops that give a similar concept still image. Only problem is instead of being a fun way to waste some perverted time, people just want to charge and make money off it.
 
As much as I like porn, nothing is better than the real thing. Instead of paying someone $100 for a deepfake, take a girl on a date.
 
if your paying for porn, you may as well pay* for sex instead.




*where legal

Yea. There's Memorex and then there's actual hookers and blow!

But then the counterpoint is that if they're paying for fake porn, then they probably can't attract the real.
 
Deepfakes which are done well are very fappable. As the technology progresses I hope to see its use in a wider range of scenarios, and by that I mean not just porn.

It's already begun, there's a sub-sect of the deepfakes community replacing actors with Nicolas Cage.

http://www.indiewire.com/2018/01/nicolas-cage-machine-learning-algorithm-deep-fakes-1201923224/

New tech tends to start with porn until moving onto what is ultimately the real purpose for the tech. This is that purpose.
 
Why is it illegal? (serious question)

If a pornstar had her features surgically altered to an exact reproduction of a celeb, would that be infringement? Would it be infringement if you and a wife shot a sextape and altered the faces to Donald Trump and Hilary Clinton for "personal use"?

I get how someone can legally own their likeness, but where is the legal definition of likeness when there is partial but not total similarity? If it's obviously someone else's body, or hair, or ears, or whatever, then the likeness is only partial. Why does the legality of the act hinge on the fidelity of the fake? Or is it just that money is changing hands?
 
Interested in seeing how good these look. All been taken down now. I did see one of Star Wars that looked insane.
 
Why is it illegal? (serious question)

If a pornstar had her features surgically altered to an exact reproduction of a celeb, would that be infringement? Would it be infringement if you and a wife shot a sextape and altered the faces to Donald Trump and Hilary Clinton for "personal use"?

I get how someone can legally own their likeness, but where is the legal definition of likeness when there is partial but not total similarity? If it's obviously someone else's body, or hair, or ears, or whatever, then the likeness is only partial. Why does the legality of the act hinge on the fidelity of the fake? Or is it just that money is changing hands?

It's probably wrong to call it illegal as there isn't a specific law against counterfeit Nicolas Cage's but you could launch a civil suit over harm done to the actor's reputation since that is intrinsic to their worth in their profession. Proving it is harmful could be difficult for some, a porn star would likely have more problems than a mainstream actor, but maybe not a Kim K.
 
Last edited:
This isn't fake porn. Porn has been photo-shopped for well over a decade and it's not fake. An erotic depiction of real intercourse is still real porn even if it's shopped.
 
Back
Top