• darthsid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    But this is nothing new? People have been using photoshop for this purpose for a long time…

    • yildo@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      “Quantity has a quality all of its own.” - Emperor Napoleon I

      The crappy Photoshop fakes of eons past were never particularly voluminous nor prolific

    • CanadaPlus@futurology.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      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.

  • SnokenKeekaGuard@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    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

    • Asidonhopo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      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.

      • SnokenKeekaGuard@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        5 months ago

        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.

        • Amanduh@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 months ago

          Idk what you guys saw but i saw her sucking not just human cock but dog cock as well lmao

          • Asidonhopo@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            Yeah no I didn’t see anything with penetration, it was all pretty amateur level tinkering looking shit. Apparently the other poster found the stronger stuff though, yikes

    • sabreW4K3@lemmy.tf
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      5 months ago

      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.