Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

mil24havoc t1_jdro878 wrote

Yes. This ship sailed a couple years ago.

58

zoupishness7 t1_jdrw0qk wrote

So, deepfakes are getting quite good, but I would suggest the main reason those influencers were able to fool so many people isn't because of the realism of the deepfake, but because beauty filters are so common on Asian social media. It's not that many users didn't recognize that a filter was being used, but that the amount that the deepfake filter changed the influencer's face was unexpected.

32

E_Snap t1_jdsarkl wrote

If the worst thing we have to worry about stemming from this is YouTubing by committee, we’re in a pretty good spot.

5

mxby7e t1_jdsqijp wrote

I got bored last night and took a look what is out there. Between diffusion and GAN workflows, you can deepfake almost anything you want in any style with just a little technical background.

You can easily take a real photo and use inpainting to replace any aspect of the image, then run it through a few img2img loops to balance the composition. You can train a subject finetune with a handful of pictures and a few hours of training time.

You can use consumer face swap tools to swap faces into any image you want.

Midjourney v5 can generate images that are hard to differentiate from real photos.

3

FermiAnyon t1_jdswreq wrote

Yeah, even if it's not literally the case now, give it another year or two. I recon video evidence in court has maybe another decade of legs

3

Matthew2229 t1_jduouwa wrote

Eh. I think video evidence will actually hold up despite deep fakes. There just has to be strong control measures. Already we admit all sorts of evidence into court which could be faked: things like documents and text messages. But they are admitted because we can explain exactly where they came from

4

FermiAnyon t1_jduvxst wrote

Ooh, text... that's a really good point. Okay okay. I'm happy to jog that back then.

1

kduyehj t1_jdtkvkx wrote

I’d guess less than 10 years. The problem with the internet as of 15y ago, maybe more is you can’t be 100% sure it’s wrong.

2

FermiAnyon t1_jdtvv5w wrote

Yeah, I'm not gonna hang my hat on a year. The most interesting and significant part about all this is that nobody seems to disagree with the claim that it's going to happen eventually and I just find that kind of amazing that we're messing with AI and having this conversation at all. I couldn't have imagined anything like this, well, like you said... 15 years ago.

Who knows what'll happen in the next 15

2

jasondads1 t1_jdtrp9l wrote

With the speed that ai is improving, it would be probably less than 1 yeat

1

uristmcderp t1_jdueokz wrote

Sounds more like you're asking about digital make-up, which can range from instagram filters to virtual avatars. And yeah, we can't tell how much of their presented look is real without a reference.

But does it matter? These people create an identity that only exists in the digital world. Who cares what they look like in the real world if you're never going to see them in the real world?

1

Username912773 t1_jdunj4k wrote

Beauty filters make the weirdness of deepfakes almost impossible to discern

1

gxcells t1_jdw8msh wrote

Of course, just use stable diffusion and train your face with Dreambooth.

1

VelvetyPenus t1_jdsa8oe wrote

morons/boomers. same people that believe the news cuz it's printed.

−8