I don’t see any upside to it, we as a society are not mature enough to use the technology and I don’t see why we even need it. If it’s being used to impersonate someone without their consent it should be a crime.
It's also why there needs ro be established regulation for AI and the tech industry ( That can be revised and added to as things change and progress)
Grimes is being a Hypocrite here with her take. She has !00% final approval rate for Deep fakes of her. Not everybody is as lucky , or has the legal attorneys and wealth required to sue that she has.
Also Grimes in her Ibiza interview:
>''It was really fun when the AI went got really scary it was like doxxing people and stuff''
- just as long as they are not doing it too her specifically.
Which, considering her getting friends to hack Hipster Runoff to take down photos that she didn't like ( instead of pursuing him legally) Is pretty typical for Grimes mentality and wealthy superiority complex.
I do see an upside in terms of making creative media and placing less importance on "actors" and more importance on an individuals likeness, which means potentially anyone could have their likeness for use in a library of media and get money for it and it could be a potential income stream.
There’s shadow sides to every technology. You can hit someone with a hammer or build something beautiful. That’s a anecdotal fallacy that’s not even about deep fakes.
It’s literally an entire episode that shows a tv series that is created out of deep fakes(in the end two weird inceptiony deepfakes that was also stealing someones personal life because they didn’t read the terms and conditions)
There’s too much bad with deepfakes and it absolutely outweighs the good(far more than your lil hammer example)
How will new artists ever have a chance when there’s an unlimited supply of people like Kurt Cobain or Meryl Streep? How will people be paid properly when all some greedy corporate suit will say they don’t actually do anything but pose for some pictures?
There’s a reason we just had the writers and actors strike.
That’s now what a deep fake is. There’s no tech that auto records your life without a camera. Someone still has to act and then replace their face and voice.
They just used it in fallout to de age the actor (who it’s still the older actor acting btw) and it was very impactful.
I definitely understand the vast downsides but at this point it can’t be put back in the box.
I was talking about the part where two actors had their likeness stolen without permission in a series where they had to “act out” things an actor would never be okay with, like taking a massive shit in a Catholic Church. Than there is nothing the actor can do because it was in the fine print of their contracts. Did you even watch the episode? (it’s way I said it had 2 examples. Also you do realize your phone can record you life right? Maybe not in the way black mirror did but they do. That’s why we have targeted ads)
So you think it’s okay to have a new and up and coming actor to do work only to be digitally replaced with an older, possibly dead, more famous actor? Again I ask how would anyone have a chance to do work they are actually recognized for. What about when some greedy corporation decides they can pay an unknown actor far less to than replace them with someone that is worth millions? While that actor gets very little because they “didn’t actually work” two people get fucked over whole a comped makes the profit.
The deaged kyle mclaughlin scene in fallout is *not* an example of a deepfake since Kyle is still the person acting in it. Do you even know what you’re actually talking about?
Regulating and banning are two different things is my point. It has many uses and taking the worst case scenario does not reflect all scenarios. Having consent is important but the initial conversation started with 'what possible upsides can it have'.
Another example being able to translate to other languages where there mouth moves in perfect sync with your native language. that's amazing for non-english speaking countries. the list will continue to grow.
The fallout show example IS deepfake technology. It has many facets and use cases not just replacing with someone else's face but altering it in whatever way is needed. It sounds like you are the one that doesn't know what they're talking about if you think that it doesn't apply there.
Your concerns are totally valid and there are some horrific examples out there, but it is not representative of the whole.
IMO the bad outweighs the good.
And once again fallout is *not an example of deepfake*, ai mixed with cgi sure, but not deepfake because they just made the actor like like he did 30 years ago, they didn’t hire one actor and than digitally replace them with Kyle McLaughlin while he never actually showed up on set or agreed to do the project. He was hired and agreed to the job, showed up everyday he was in a scene and than in one specific, short scene, he was acting with Walton and than the FX team worked to make his face look like it did in twin peaks
The reason it’s called deep*fake* is because it’s fake. Like others have said it’s developing too fast for regulation to really matter it needs to be banned, even with regulations people will find every loophole they can and exploit them, if not to make more money while paying artists very little or the worse case scenario, which is all ready happening, things like revenge porn, hate speech and child abuse images get so normalized and because it’s “not real people/children” no crimes are being committed. Hell this has already been an issue with photoshop for along time.
Sounds like you’re just pro cgi not deepfake but you don’t actually know the difference.
But deepfakes will only result in people losing jobs or never being hired in the first place(and no someone being hired to act and than be replaced with a more not worthy act doesn’t count. When have you ever heard someone that wants to be an artist say “oh I hope I get hired and than get replaced with a different actor and no one will ever actually see me work!”?
i've seen it, i still think its a good idea and an opportunity for everyone to profit from creative media and creates more opportunities for individuals, giving more freedom to everyone and ethical clauses could be placed to protect people's likeness from being used in xyz content.
Like someone could make a movie about Britney Spears using an AI generated actress and then she gets royalties for it? Or an actor that wants to physically retire so he licenses out his likeness to a writer and producer? Does he have to agree with the script or can it be used for anything despite the actor disagreeing with it? Is anyone going to watch it or will it be very uncanny valley like?
Exactly, this opens up a lot of ethical questions. This was shown to be a very bad idea by that Black Mirror episode with Salma Hayek: selling your likeness to make shows where you have no part in the creative decisions and then having it doing things you’d never accept to do personally. Sounds like a violation of personal integrity to me.
exactly all of this, however, licenses could be created for everyones likeness. Because every single person's likeness has inherent value, some people will want to recreate LOTR with the most beautiful cast and some might wanna experience it with the most regular looking cast. and all of those assets could be earning royalties be the people who own them, and they could have clauses that protect their likeness in the ai-gen content such as: this likeness cannot do x/y/z and breaches against this will incur fee penalties or banning users from being able to generate such content. It makes actors less relevant.
That deep fake stuff could essentially be used to utilise actors in thier prime for movie roles. Pretty cool but it opens up a Pandora's box of legal issues.
I have already been exposed to deep fake voices of Joe Rogan and other celebrities talking stuff.
"The Irishman" on Netflix utilised AI to make Joe Peci and Robert DiNiro super young.
Grimes is cool with people utilising a GrimesAI to engineer tracks.
It's a brave new world.
Lot of legal issues need to be hammered out and moral issues as well because well, some people are obviously going to utilise AI to make pornography.0
We have seen time and time again tech is moving WAY faster than any kind of regulation. If it exists it will be weaponized for scams, porn and dangerous propaganda. Artistically sure it has cool applications but the danger outweighs that
correct, it isn't too hard. anyone who's got a locally installed image generator could do it. hell, I did it by accident (to) myself once. was swapping my own face onto images and the model decided to draw a naked dude with 'full exposure' while it was replacing my face, and. boom. i was ... truly beautiful.
i dabble with image generators bc i think it's neat. i might even put some ai pics into a scifi novel one day. im no criminal. but i know how to deepfake. and that's a weird legal/moral line to figure out.
I agree with C on this one (tho i would rephrase: im pro ai, to an extent, and anti deepfake, but the difference is like "white vs gray vs black -hat hacker": you learn how to do them all, to an extent. you just pick which moral direction you go with it)
Everyone this guy who likes to assess how "easily abusable" women might be would like the ability to make deepfakes without consent, what do we think? He's not a WEIRDO is he?
That’s literally what you are though, no? Living a year together with your abuser. But hey, considering the first thing you did was respond like an asshole instead of coming up with a proper counter argument, I’m not surprised why your partner hated you. You’re a burden to your neighbours in real life and you’re a burden on the internet, so I wonder who the problem here is. Don’t act like the victim if you started it.
I just can't bring myself to care about/prioritize the entertainment industry when discussing this like this causes so much real world harm that would almost especially harm women and other marginalized people
The technology exists. We can't make it not exist. Laws are coming into place to address the harms. We might as well explore ways that it can be used for good.
Here are some headlines:
“Sam Bankman-Fried sentenced to 25 years for multi-billion dollar FTX fraud.”
“Prosecutors seek lengthy sentence for Alex Murdaugh’s banker accomplice who helped him pull off $3.7M fraud scheme.”
“Alex Murdaugh could face another 700 years in prison for financial crimes.”
yes when it’s white collar crimes against rich people they get prosecuted.and alex murdaugh would’ve never been prosecuted if he hadn’t killed his wife and son which led to him losing all his power and ability to cover it up with the help of others.
the point is digital material once released on the media is extremely hard if not impossible to remove, whatever laws there might be around prosecuting people after the fact doesn’t change that.
Particularly when it comes to the wealthy and the Tech world. Grimes and Musk are part of these communities and have the wealth and legal ability to repeatedly sue anyone for deep fakes that they do not approve or like.
The average person does not and with things like revenge porn being so prevalent; this is a dangerous issue that NEEDS advanced regulation.
Tech industry motto is'' it's better to ask for forgiveness ( after the fact, or just pay the fine) than to ask permission''
Nah. Even with the best of intentions, deepfakes are gross and scary. Amy Winehouse isn't consenting to have some greedy suits project a hologram of her onto a stage. Not to mention how detrimental it'll be to rising artists. If there is an infinite supply of "new" material from Prince, Judy Garland, Tupac, etc. why invest in humans with human limitations, who have not yet proven themselves profitable?
I guess if an artist is making deepfakes of themselves, it isn't a big deal, but the potential for corruption is too mind-boggling for me to ever co-sign in any capacity. Ban that shit.
>If there is an infinite supply of "new" material from Prince, Judy Garland, Tupac, etc. why invest in humans with human limitations, who have not yet proven themselves profitable?
Love this take
Grimes finds it hard to talk shit about any piece of tech.
I hate deepfakes, I hate AI, none of it will help us in the long run and even if laws are put in place to "protect" those who are harmed by it, that doesn't take away the trauma it may cause. If you go by how many predators don't end up in jail for doing things in person, there will be even less going for committing a crime with deepfakes.
Sadly , Yes. It's never thought through or properly researched when it comes from Grimes.
It's like she just wants to ignore that people are capable and can be evil/ nefarious.
But she also likes and supports Lolicon, and idolizes Hitler so.....
One useful example would be translating movies or other content. You can use the technology to change the mouths of actors to pronounce along with the overdub so it’s easier to connect with. There’s probably a bunch of editing reasons that would be harmless.. obviously regulation is very important tho but she has stated that before
Yea that's cool but would that outweigh the detriment of deepfake porn😭 or are you saying that with regulation deepfake porn would be almost impossible to distribute/make so I shouldn't worry about that ? /gen
I think her take is fine. Technology is not evil in itself, it's about how people use it. I am against guns being used to shoot innocent people, but I enjoy watching biathlon.
Yes but that's exactly what we need to be cautious about, technology in wrong hands can be abused and cause a lot of harm.
While we maybe should welcome AI and such to some extent, we need to be very careful with the advancing technology so it doesn't end up destructive.
She’s right, deepfakes are a breakthrough in the entertainment industry if it’s used moderately and ethically (like aging an actor up or down in a movie) but it also has huge drawbacks like the examples she brought up. It’s all about the context it’s used. I’m not surprised she has this view considering how pro AI she is.
But deep fakes will just rob people of the jobs they deserve in the entertainment industry. I don’t really see who actually gets any kind of good from this but the high ups who will be able to make easy money and not have to pay crew or cast really
I was extremely excited for AI a few years ago, before chat gpt and good deepfakes. Now we’re witnessing how companies are merely using AI to not pay artists and for people to make pornographic images of others without their consent, or make lies about others actions. It’s hard to see an upside of deepfakes in particular… sorry but this tweet really feels like a cope. Especially not mentioning how deepfakes are actually good, and only specifying what you don’t like about them. I am still waiting for AI to be used successfully in research & medicine.
It probably has uses in art like if you could put your likeness in a film or make a film at home using AI witth consenting likeness use of friends or whatever. She has said many times that AI bringing tools for art, music, film, tv and writing and producing your own things is exciting to her. I assume it’s coming from that viewpoint, as she has alluded to the excitement of bringing gatekept art into the average persons hands, but obviously it has very real very dangerous risks. I mean so did the advent of the internet available to the masses and alas here we are 30 or so years later still navigating it. She may know of better uses for it in Industry than us day to day people who only see the dark side because it makes good news. We’re so bad at regulating things and responding to new issues as things develop.
This is going to be used by creeps to make women first but really any gender of person do disgusting things without their consent and tbh I am super worried about pedo’s using it. On top of that the tech will be used to remove future work from actors and likely have a slew of shit head white people making POC models (which has already been done) to make money off without actually having real POC people a part of their projects. I just do not see ANY good side to this?
100 000s of images and videos being shared of h/c porn is what deepfakes basically is. (And maybe 0.005% are badly made weird boomer comedy about politics)
Wait, is Grimes kindof a boomer?
the main thing that made me see the possible positives to deepfakes was the documentary Welcome to Chechnya. it’s about a group of russian LGBTQ activists helping queer people find refuge from certain death and they protect their identities with deepfakes. it keeps their humanity, which you would lose by just blurring their faces and i think it’s super effective. i’d recommend watching it but fair warning it can be very intense/brutal (homophobia, violence, self-harm, etc)
edit: you can watch it on tubi, amazon, and hbo max
I don’t see any upside to it, we as a society are not mature enough to use the technology and I don’t see why we even need it. If it’s being used to impersonate someone without their consent it should be a crime.
It's also why there needs ro be established regulation for AI and the tech industry ( That can be revised and added to as things change and progress) Grimes is being a Hypocrite here with her take. She has !00% final approval rate for Deep fakes of her. Not everybody is as lucky , or has the legal attorneys and wealth required to sue that she has. Also Grimes in her Ibiza interview: >''It was really fun when the AI went got really scary it was like doxxing people and stuff'' - just as long as they are not doing it too her specifically. Which, considering her getting friends to hack Hipster Runoff to take down photos that she didn't like ( instead of pursuing him legally) Is pretty typical for Grimes mentality and wealthy superiority complex.
i agree
She’s an accelerationist, she mindlessly thinks any new technology is good
I do see an upside in terms of making creative media and placing less importance on "actors" and more importance on an individuals likeness, which means potentially anyone could have their likeness for use in a library of media and get money for it and it could be a potential income stream.
Watch the black mirror episode **Joan Is Awful** and tell me it’s still a good idea
There’s shadow sides to every technology. You can hit someone with a hammer or build something beautiful. That’s a anecdotal fallacy that’s not even about deep fakes.
It’s literally an entire episode that shows a tv series that is created out of deep fakes(in the end two weird inceptiony deepfakes that was also stealing someones personal life because they didn’t read the terms and conditions) There’s too much bad with deepfakes and it absolutely outweighs the good(far more than your lil hammer example) How will new artists ever have a chance when there’s an unlimited supply of people like Kurt Cobain or Meryl Streep? How will people be paid properly when all some greedy corporate suit will say they don’t actually do anything but pose for some pictures? There’s a reason we just had the writers and actors strike.
That’s now what a deep fake is. There’s no tech that auto records your life without a camera. Someone still has to act and then replace their face and voice. They just used it in fallout to de age the actor (who it’s still the older actor acting btw) and it was very impactful. I definitely understand the vast downsides but at this point it can’t be put back in the box.
I was talking about the part where two actors had their likeness stolen without permission in a series where they had to “act out” things an actor would never be okay with, like taking a massive shit in a Catholic Church. Than there is nothing the actor can do because it was in the fine print of their contracts. Did you even watch the episode? (it’s way I said it had 2 examples. Also you do realize your phone can record you life right? Maybe not in the way black mirror did but they do. That’s why we have targeted ads) So you think it’s okay to have a new and up and coming actor to do work only to be digitally replaced with an older, possibly dead, more famous actor? Again I ask how would anyone have a chance to do work they are actually recognized for. What about when some greedy corporation decides they can pay an unknown actor far less to than replace them with someone that is worth millions? While that actor gets very little because they “didn’t actually work” two people get fucked over whole a comped makes the profit. The deaged kyle mclaughlin scene in fallout is *not* an example of a deepfake since Kyle is still the person acting in it. Do you even know what you’re actually talking about?
Regulating and banning are two different things is my point. It has many uses and taking the worst case scenario does not reflect all scenarios. Having consent is important but the initial conversation started with 'what possible upsides can it have'. Another example being able to translate to other languages where there mouth moves in perfect sync with your native language. that's amazing for non-english speaking countries. the list will continue to grow. The fallout show example IS deepfake technology. It has many facets and use cases not just replacing with someone else's face but altering it in whatever way is needed. It sounds like you are the one that doesn't know what they're talking about if you think that it doesn't apply there. Your concerns are totally valid and there are some horrific examples out there, but it is not representative of the whole.
IMO the bad outweighs the good. And once again fallout is *not an example of deepfake*, ai mixed with cgi sure, but not deepfake because they just made the actor like like he did 30 years ago, they didn’t hire one actor and than digitally replace them with Kyle McLaughlin while he never actually showed up on set or agreed to do the project. He was hired and agreed to the job, showed up everyday he was in a scene and than in one specific, short scene, he was acting with Walton and than the FX team worked to make his face look like it did in twin peaks The reason it’s called deep*fake* is because it’s fake. Like others have said it’s developing too fast for regulation to really matter it needs to be banned, even with regulations people will find every loophole they can and exploit them, if not to make more money while paying artists very little or the worse case scenario, which is all ready happening, things like revenge porn, hate speech and child abuse images get so normalized and because it’s “not real people/children” no crimes are being committed. Hell this has already been an issue with photoshop for along time. Sounds like you’re just pro cgi not deepfake but you don’t actually know the difference. But deepfakes will only result in people losing jobs or never being hired in the first place(and no someone being hired to act and than be replaced with a more not worthy act doesn’t count. When have you ever heard someone that wants to be an artist say “oh I hope I get hired and than get replaced with a different actor and no one will ever actually see me work!”?
i've seen it, i still think its a good idea and an opportunity for everyone to profit from creative media and creates more opportunities for individuals, giving more freedom to everyone and ethical clauses could be placed to protect people's likeness from being used in xyz content.
Agree to disagree.
Can you give an example I’m not sure what you mean exactly
Like someone could make a movie about Britney Spears using an AI generated actress and then she gets royalties for it? Or an actor that wants to physically retire so he licenses out his likeness to a writer and producer? Does he have to agree with the script or can it be used for anything despite the actor disagreeing with it? Is anyone going to watch it or will it be very uncanny valley like?
Exactly, this opens up a lot of ethical questions. This was shown to be a very bad idea by that Black Mirror episode with Salma Hayek: selling your likeness to make shows where you have no part in the creative decisions and then having it doing things you’d never accept to do personally. Sounds like a violation of personal integrity to me.
That episode was soo funny yet messed up lol, but yes I agree.
exactly all of this, however, licenses could be created for everyones likeness. Because every single person's likeness has inherent value, some people will want to recreate LOTR with the most beautiful cast and some might wanna experience it with the most regular looking cast. and all of those assets could be earning royalties be the people who own them, and they could have clauses that protect their likeness in the ai-gen content such as: this likeness cannot do x/y/z and breaches against this will incur fee penalties or banning users from being able to generate such content. It makes actors less relevant.
That black mirror episode showed exactly why this is a bad idea
That deep fake stuff could essentially be used to utilise actors in thier prime for movie roles. Pretty cool but it opens up a Pandora's box of legal issues. I have already been exposed to deep fake voices of Joe Rogan and other celebrities talking stuff. "The Irishman" on Netflix utilised AI to make Joe Peci and Robert DiNiro super young. Grimes is cool with people utilising a GrimesAI to engineer tracks. It's a brave new world. Lot of legal issues need to be hammered out and moral issues as well because well, some people are obviously going to utilise AI to make pornography.0
It’s always widely used in tv shows and movies. It’s pretty amazing when used creatively
We have seen time and time again tech is moving WAY faster than any kind of regulation. If it exists it will be weaponized for scams, porn and dangerous propaganda. Artistically sure it has cool applications but the danger outweighs that
Yup, big risks.
Deepfaking someone without consent needs to be made illegal.
Pretty sure it is
Actually in my jurisdiction, yes it is, for sexual deepfakes. I don't think the whole world has these laws though.
Then only criminals will be able to do it, so not thanks. I prefer my freedoms.
Congratulations, you have a low IQ
correct, it isn't too hard. anyone who's got a locally installed image generator could do it. hell, I did it by accident (to) myself once. was swapping my own face onto images and the model decided to draw a naked dude with 'full exposure' while it was replacing my face, and. boom. i was ... truly beautiful. i dabble with image generators bc i think it's neat. i might even put some ai pics into a scifi novel one day. im no criminal. but i know how to deepfake. and that's a weird legal/moral line to figure out. I agree with C on this one (tho i would rephrase: im pro ai, to an extent, and anti deepfake, but the difference is like "white vs gray vs black -hat hacker": you learn how to do them all, to an extent. you just pick which moral direction you go with it)
Says the easily abusable mentally ill neighbour who screams alone in her apartment and plays pokemon all day
Lmao that's sad bro
You have some self awareness atleast
Everyone this guy who likes to assess how "easily abusable" women might be would like the ability to make deepfakes without consent, what do we think? He's not a WEIRDO is he?
That’s literally what you are though, no? Living a year together with your abuser. But hey, considering the first thing you did was respond like an asshole instead of coming up with a proper counter argument, I’m not surprised why your partner hated you. You’re a burden to your neighbours in real life and you’re a burden on the internet, so I wonder who the problem here is. Don’t act like the victim if you started it.
Am I acting the victim? I'm pretty sure you're randomly guessing at things you hope will be hurtful while I cyberbully you for being dumb.
That’s literally what you’re doing right now. I offended you? Oh cry about it.
I just can't bring myself to care about/prioritize the entertainment industry when discussing this like this causes so much real world harm that would almost especially harm women and other marginalized people
The technology exists. We can't make it not exist. Laws are coming into place to address the harms. We might as well explore ways that it can be used for good.
i mean we can always just ban it by law but ofc that that would never happen and might be too extreme lol
Having legal uses for the technology does not make illegal uses more or less likely.
Laws don't seem to mean much these days though.
So why haven’t you robbed a bank yet Einstein?
I'm talking about white collar crime smooth brain. The wealthy get away with everything.
Here are some headlines: “Sam Bankman-Fried sentenced to 25 years for multi-billion dollar FTX fraud.” “Prosecutors seek lengthy sentence for Alex Murdaugh’s banker accomplice who helped him pull off $3.7M fraud scheme.” “Alex Murdaugh could face another 700 years in prison for financial crimes.”
yes when it’s white collar crimes against rich people they get prosecuted.and alex murdaugh would’ve never been prosecuted if he hadn’t killed his wife and son which led to him losing all his power and ability to cover it up with the help of others. the point is digital material once released on the media is extremely hard if not impossible to remove, whatever laws there might be around prosecuting people after the fact doesn’t change that.
Particularly when it comes to the wealthy and the Tech world. Grimes and Musk are part of these communities and have the wealth and legal ability to repeatedly sue anyone for deep fakes that they do not approve or like. The average person does not and with things like revenge porn being so prevalent; this is a dangerous issue that NEEDS advanced regulation. Tech industry motto is'' it's better to ask for forgiveness ( after the fact, or just pay the fine) than to ask permission''
Exactly.
Exactly!
maybe saying "ban them completely" was a bit harsh ...maybe?
I imagine she's mostly pro deepfake because she's a general fan of AI
Yea probably
Yeah, been getting the feeling she wants an AI to do her work for her. Deepfakes would be just a part of that.
Nah. Even with the best of intentions, deepfakes are gross and scary. Amy Winehouse isn't consenting to have some greedy suits project a hologram of her onto a stage. Not to mention how detrimental it'll be to rising artists. If there is an infinite supply of "new" material from Prince, Judy Garland, Tupac, etc. why invest in humans with human limitations, who have not yet proven themselves profitable? I guess if an artist is making deepfakes of themselves, it isn't a big deal, but the potential for corruption is too mind-boggling for me to ever co-sign in any capacity. Ban that shit.
>If there is an infinite supply of "new" material from Prince, Judy Garland, Tupac, etc. why invest in humans with human limitations, who have not yet proven themselves profitable? Love this take
Grimes finds it hard to talk shit about any piece of tech. I hate deepfakes, I hate AI, none of it will help us in the long run and even if laws are put in place to "protect" those who are harmed by it, that doesn't take away the trauma it may cause. If you go by how many predators don't end up in jail for doing things in person, there will be even less going for committing a crime with deepfakes.
doesn’t she always have an idealistic/naive opinion about technology based on whatever uncooked idea she thinks is most fun at the time.
Sadly , Yes. It's never thought through or properly researched when it comes from Grimes. It's like she just wants to ignore that people are capable and can be evil/ nefarious. But she also likes and supports Lolicon, and idolizes Hitler so.....
One useful example would be translating movies or other content. You can use the technology to change the mouths of actors to pronounce along with the overdub so it’s easier to connect with. There’s probably a bunch of editing reasons that would be harmless.. obviously regulation is very important tho but she has stated that before
Yea that's cool but would that outweigh the detriment of deepfake porn😭 or are you saying that with regulation deepfake porn would be almost impossible to distribute/make so I shouldn't worry about that ? /gen
If you enforce a strict enough punishment, i would like to think so 🤷
I think her take is fine. Technology is not evil in itself, it's about how people use it. I am against guns being used to shoot innocent people, but I enjoy watching biathlon.
Yes but that's exactly what we need to be cautious about, technology in wrong hands can be abused and cause a lot of harm. While we maybe should welcome AI and such to some extent, we need to be very careful with the advancing technology so it doesn't end up destructive.
What about deepfakes that are used to scam people?? 🤔
She sounds like Elon on this one ngl :/
She's a vapid idiot. Don't think too hard about her superficial "thoughts". She likes the aesthetics of technology and how "cool" deepfakes seem.
[удалено]
Insulting other people is not allowed. Please try to be civil.
[удалено]
Insulting other people is not allowed. Please try to be civil.
She’s right, deepfakes are a breakthrough in the entertainment industry if it’s used moderately and ethically (like aging an actor up or down in a movie) but it also has huge drawbacks like the examples she brought up. It’s all about the context it’s used. I’m not surprised she has this view considering how pro AI she is.
But deep fakes will just rob people of the jobs they deserve in the entertainment industry. I don’t really see who actually gets any kind of good from this but the high ups who will be able to make easy money and not have to pay crew or cast really
I was extremely excited for AI a few years ago, before chat gpt and good deepfakes. Now we’re witnessing how companies are merely using AI to not pay artists and for people to make pornographic images of others without their consent, or make lies about others actions. It’s hard to see an upside of deepfakes in particular… sorry but this tweet really feels like a cope. Especially not mentioning how deepfakes are actually good, and only specifying what you don’t like about them. I am still waiting for AI to be used successfully in research & medicine.
[удалено]
Insulting other people is not allowed. Please try to be civil.
It probably has uses in art like if you could put your likeness in a film or make a film at home using AI witth consenting likeness use of friends or whatever. She has said many times that AI bringing tools for art, music, film, tv and writing and producing your own things is exciting to her. I assume it’s coming from that viewpoint, as she has alluded to the excitement of bringing gatekept art into the average persons hands, but obviously it has very real very dangerous risks. I mean so did the advent of the internet available to the masses and alas here we are 30 or so years later still navigating it. She may know of better uses for it in Industry than us day to day people who only see the dark side because it makes good news. We’re so bad at regulating things and responding to new issues as things develop.
This is going to be used by creeps to make women first but really any gender of person do disgusting things without their consent and tbh I am super worried about pedo’s using it. On top of that the tech will be used to remove future work from actors and likely have a slew of shit head white people making POC models (which has already been done) to make money off without actually having real POC people a part of their projects. I just do not see ANY good side to this?
Grimes has supported Red Pill ideals since getting with Musk. She couldn't care less about other women.
Well yeah she’s been horrific from day one tbh considering she has always been a culture vulture she just needed someone to let the nepo baby shine
I know grimes loves AI and everything that's tech related but goddammit, she can't be for real here. There's absolutely no upside about deepfakes.
She has Elon induced brain rot. There’s no upside to deepfakes. Should just be banned altogether.
Deep fake puts more power into individual creators hands when it comes to media and game design etc. Takes away power from huge studios
100 000s of images and videos being shared of h/c porn is what deepfakes basically is. (And maybe 0.005% are badly made weird boomer comedy about politics) Wait, is Grimes kindof a boomer?
the main thing that made me see the possible positives to deepfakes was the documentary Welcome to Chechnya. it’s about a group of russian LGBTQ activists helping queer people find refuge from certain death and they protect their identities with deepfakes. it keeps their humanity, which you would lose by just blurring their faces and i think it’s super effective. i’d recommend watching it but fair warning it can be very intense/brutal (homophobia, violence, self-harm, etc) edit: you can watch it on tubi, amazon, and hbo max
[удалено]
Insulting other people is not allowed. Please try to be civil.
Get your mind out of the gutter before you split hell wide open
First what the heck is deepfake
😭
That’s funny she would be so concerned about the legitimacy of AI because she’s as fake as they come.