But this is nothing new? People have been using photoshop for this purpose for a long time…
this post was submitted on 29 Jan 2024
11 points (64.1% liked)
Futurology
3032 readers
67 users here now
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
"Quantity has a quality all of its own." - Emperor Napoleon I
The crappy Photoshop fakes of eons past were never particularly voluminous nor prolific
Yeah. I feel like there's a real lack of discussion about where the dividing line should be on the issue. How different from just imagining it is it, really? Nobody's saying your dirty mind should be banned.
Now, if you actually send this shit to Taylor Swift, that 100% should be criminal.
There's been so much talk about this, that I unfortunately now want to see the pictures and see what all the fuss is about
They are lurid but low quality and would be difficult but not impossible to mistake for actual photographs. They seem to be relying on football-themed body paint to work around the image generators safety features that prevent nudes from being produced. Somewhat convincing nipples and/or buttocks are sometimes visible, suggestive facial expressions, posture and positioning with other figures do most of the heavy lifting in producing these "erotic" images but I've seen nothing beyond that. It's more nude caricature than pornography. They are more than a little goofy looking.
Just saw it, assumed smth much worse with all the talk. Theres been better deepfakes for years. This wasnt even particularly photorealistic. But they do have a derogatory undertone to em.
Idk what you guys saw but i saw her sucking not just human cock but dog cock as well lmao
Ok no I haven't seen either of those. I saw some cartoon characters involved tho.
Edit. Ok saw some stuff now.
Honestly, I keep hearing about them and now I want to see them. As I don't use mainstream social media, it's hard. It's like being on Linux and wanting to know about a virus that every Windows user was getting.