Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
AI Google Open Source Software The Internet Technology

AI-Assisted Fake Porn Is Here and We're All Screwed (vice.com) 291

New submitter samleecole shares a report from Motherboard: There's a video of Gal Gadot having sex with her stepbrother on the internet. But it's not really Gadot's body, and it's barely her own face. It's an approximation, face-swapped to look like she's performing in an existing incest-themed porn video. The video was created with a machine learning algorithm, using easily accessible materials and open-source code that anyone with a working knowledge of deep learning algorithms could put together. It's not going to fool anyone who looks closely. Sometimes the face doesn't track correctly and there's an uncanny valley effect at play, but at a glance it seems believable. It's especially striking considering that it's allegedly the work of one person -- a Redditor who goes by the name 'deepfakes' -- not a big special effects studio that can digitally recreate a young Princess Leia in Rouge One using CGI. Instead, deepfakes uses open-source machine learning tools like TensorFlow, which Google makes freely available to researchers, graduate students, and anyone with an interest in machine learning. Anyone could do it, and that should make everyone nervous.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

AI-Assisted Fake Porn Is Here and We're All Screwed

Comments Filter:
  • by jfdavis668 ( 1414919 ) on Monday December 11, 2017 @05:44PM (#55719919)
    Soon we will not be able to determine real from fake. Nothing can be proven real. We will have to suspect everything.
  • Why is this bad? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 11, 2017 @05:46PM (#55719931)
    Let people act out their fantasies in VR rather than have them do it in real life. If it doesn't hurt anyone, then why is it anyone's business?
    • 3D hentai porn, here I come!

      Giggity!

    • Like Timothy Leary said in the 80s, in the future you can create your own reality with computers; drugs aren't needed anymore!

      "Who controls the screens you look at controls your mind... you've got to control the screens you look at"

      "Everybody gets the pixels they want, everybody gets the pixels they deserve!"

      Welcome to the future.

      • It took Dennis miller a couple more decades to recapitulate the sentiment, though done much more realistically IMO:

        "You know, folks, the day an unemployed ironworker can lay in his Bark-a-lounger with a Fosters in one hand and a channel flicker in the other and fuck Claudia Schiffer for $19.95, its gonna make crack look like Sanka."

        This is how the world ends. With a bang.

        • It seems that way initially, but there are biological limitations to how much wanking a guy can do. Skin wears out faster than it can be replaced, bleeding starts, scabs form. That limits how much a guy can do. Also, long term erections damage internal parts of the penis (Peronie's syndrome is one possible result.) Third, once orgasm is achieved, most men lose interest in sex for a while. If all a guy does is masturbate, even that becomes not very interesting eventually.

          Then, the Darwinistic aspect also ha

          • In fairness, what Timothy Leary was talking about was two or more humans being able to choose their reality together for that sort of activity; I'm sure it was quite obvious to him that the emotional aspect is the important human part.

            He did say everybody can have the pixels they deserve, but I don't think it is really intended as encouragement to worry about what boring mindless people will want to use it for.

            Also, evolution doesn't care how you spent the rest of your life; unless the machine malfunctions

        • It took Dennis miller a couple more decades to recapitulate the sentiment, though done much more realistically IMO:

          "You know, folks, the day an unemployed ironworker can lay in his Bark-a-lounger with a Fosters in one hand and a channel flicker in the other and fuck Claudia Schiffer for $19.95, its gonna make crack look like Sanka."

          This is how the world ends. With a bang.

          And a severely inflamed prostate.

          • No, not doing it gives you that problem. Clearing the pipes frequently leads to a healthy prostate.

            It is probably the only part of the body that benefits!

    • by Anonymous Coward

      Let people act out their fantasies in VR rather than have them do it in real life. If it doesn't hurt anyone, then why is it anyone's business?

      Because the sick twisted fucks aren't doing it in VR; they're doing it using time machines. When they come back, they tell us "Rouge One" is the name of a movie where they're from, but in our universe it's "Rogue One." Don't you see? Someone went back in time and stepped on a butterfly.

      If they'd stick to fucking Tyrannosaurus Rexen in VR, we wouldn't be having this

    • by bobbied ( 2522392 ) on Monday December 11, 2017 @07:08PM (#55720527)

      Let people act out their fantasies in VR rather than have them do it in real life. If it doesn't hurt anyone, then why is it anyone's business?

      Well.. This confirmed prude doesn't care as long as:

      1. The only person possibly hurt is you.

      2. I don't have to know about it... AND...

      3. You don't make me approve of your choices.

      If you can live within those limits, do what you want, just leave me out of it...

      • by rtb61 ( 674572 )

        I get stuck on the idea of fake pron (free porn), how can you actually have fake pron. I mean, does it like pretend to be pron but get's no one off. Sort of like how soft core pron is viewed today ie not real pron and gets no one off any more, except Hollywood weirdos who like to do their business on shrubbery.

        I dare say once photo realistic computer animation takes off, all pron and all other content will be computer generated, no rutting monkeys required, either on screen or on hollywoods couches require

        • by morethanapapercert ( 749527 ) on Monday December 11, 2017 @10:18PM (#55721627)
          I've posted this before on related stories, but I think it bears repeating: Once the uncanny valley is definitively conquered and rendering becomes cost-competitive with a live actor, I predict we're going to see a return to the old "studio system" of the silver screen era. Only, instead of a bunch of utility actors and a few big stars whose lives are micro-managed by the studio, we're going to see studios and production companies coming up with their own virtual cast and headline stars. No union worries, so scandals, no practical limits on how much "on set" time a given character can give. (no child labour laws!!!) Absolutely everything about a character being micro-managed and massaged according to the latest polls and trends. Popular characters never have to age, they can't hold a production hostage demanding a bigger cut of the proceeds and can be "fired" incredibly easily and comparatively cheaply.

          What is going to be interesting are the lawsuits over the use of the likeness of some dead celebrities. Is there any studios that still have movie rights to Elvis? Would his estate disagree? Could an actors estate sue on the grounds that a given production was one that the actor would never have been caught dead in? (see what I did there?)

          • Consider the Tomb Raider Level Editor. Fans can (and do) make very detailed adventures based on existing game engines. It's a lot of work, but a few people can make a professional quality product for only nominal amounts of money. That puts big studios at a substantial economic disadvantage.
  • by Aero77 ( 1242364 ) on Monday December 11, 2017 @05:47PM (#55719935)
    The real threat will be fabricated "video surveillance" footage and other "proof" used to "prove" or "disprove" anything the editor wants. What do you believe when everything you see can plausibly be called "fake news"?
    • It will discredit real video evidence showing someone was victimized. By someone who would grab women by the covfefe. It's like a magnet he just has to kiss them. Needs a mouth full of tic tacs. He just can't help himself. They'll let you do anything if you're a star / potus.
    • by nine-times ( 778537 ) <nine.times@gmail.com> on Monday December 11, 2017 @06:09PM (#55720111) Homepage

      It's one thing to create edited video that fools a casual observer, and another that stands up to forensic analysis.

      I don't know how far we are from having undetectable fakes. I don't know if we can stop that from happening, and I don't know what we do if we reach that point. I could see there being something where each camera manufacturer embeds certificate in each camera, which can then be used to digitally sign each frame of video. I'm sure there'd be downsides and it wouldn't make things absolutely tamper-proof, but it could make undetectable forgeries harder to create.

      I suspect there will be a bit of an arms race between forgers and people trying to make forgeries difficult, sort of the same way the government keeps creating anti-counterfeit measures for money. It doesn't 100% stop counterfeiters, but it generally makes it possible to detect counterfeit money if you're looking for it.

      • I got a foreshadowing of our future with Forrest Gump "showing up" at so many historical events.

      • by Thirty4 ( 4977493 ) on Monday December 11, 2017 @06:15PM (#55720151)
        By the time a good fake video is shown to be fake, people would have moved on. Damage done.
      • by omnichad ( 1198475 ) on Monday December 11, 2017 @06:26PM (#55720227) Homepage

        I could see there being something where each camera manufacturer embeds certificate in each camera, which can then be used to digitally sign each frame of video.

        I could see that too. It would have nothing to do with fake news. It would be about DRM and your rights to use video that you shot on your own hardware without paying extra.

      • Strange how technology eventually fools itself, eh?
        • by slew ( 2918 )

          Strange how technology eventually fools itself, eh?

          As it turns out, that's by design [wikipedia.org]...

          We train some technology to create fakes, and more technology to detect fakes and let them train each other. After a while training, we have a pretty good technology to create fakes that we humans can't easily detect...

      • It's one thing to create edited video that fools a casual observer

        aka: A voter.

      • It's one thing to create edited video that fools a casual observer, and another that stands up to forensic analysis.

        We'll just hire "our" forensic expert to say that "your' forensic expert is wrong. Fake News etc.

        • by EvilSS ( 557649 )

          It's one thing to create edited video that fools a casual observer, and another that stands up to forensic analysis.

          We'll just hire "our" forensic expert to say that "your' forensic expert is wrong. Fake News etc.

          Nah, just show a video of the forensic expert taking bribes!

      • by C3ntaur ( 642283 )

        It's one thing to create edited video that fools a casual observer, and another that stands up to forensic analysis.

        It won't matter once the general population is too stupid to understand the science behind forensic analysis. And we're heading rapidly in that direction.

      • by eth1 ( 94901 )

        It's one thing to create edited video that fools a casual observer, and another that stands up to forensic analysis.

        Unless it's an oppressive state that's fabricating the videos to get rid of "inconvenient" people.

        The way the court of public opinion works, they don't need to stand up to that kind of rigor, anyway.

      • by gweihir ( 88907 )

        I would expect an arms-race here, i.e. detecting fakes will always be possible, but get very expensive after a while. That means it will only be done when it is really, really important. That also means the assumption will be "fake" by default, same as "presumed innocent". Otherwise it would be way too easy to incriminate innocent people. As usual, with any new tech, this state will need a while to be reached though.

      • This will likely result in custody of evidence becoming ever more critical. Videos of alleged criminals would have to get into police hands and protected from alteration quickly and with a documented history. Physical evidence will become more important as video evidence becomes less trustworthy.
    • The real threat will be fabricated "video surveillance" footage and other "proof" used to "prove" or "disprove" anything the editor wants. What do you believe when everything you see can plausibly be called "fake news"?

      Are we not ALREADY living in the age where you cannot trust video, audio or photographic evidence as proof of anything? I think we do.

      • by gweihir ( 88907 )

        We do. Just that some people have not gotten the message yet. But "video evidence" was never very good in the first place. The whole idea that it is "just like being there" is bogus and in addition, eye-witnesses are very unreliable despite actually having been there. Most people see a mix between what actually is and what the expect to see, with a strong preference for the latter. This happens even with recorded video and people that are supposedly experts.

    • by Dwedit ( 232252 )

      There is one thing that can be done for live video: Cryptographic signed timestamps by a trusted third party.
      While that can't tell you that whether it was altered or not in real time, it can tell you that a piece of information did exist as a specific time.

  • Not all downside (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Pfhorrest ( 545131 ) on Monday December 11, 2017 @05:53PM (#55719983) Homepage Journal

    Imagine if the day comes when you can insta-generate porn featuring a hotter version of yourself fucking your favorite pornstar.

    • 'Hey baby If you just wear this VR helmet, I'll look just like Brad Pitt while we're fucking.' Once she puts hers on, you get the second hidden one out for yourself.

      The VR headset will just be the modern version of complete total darkness.

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Aighearach ( 97333 )

        You're mistakenly presenting being double-creepy as if it would be a shield to hide your creepiness.

        Hint: If you're even talking about one person wearing it, talk about both people wearing it. Parity = Good, groveling at her Pedestal = Creeper

        • Any supposed pickup line that starts with 'Hey baby' isn't likely serious.

          BTW the technology for one person to wear a VR helmet while the other provides 'feel around' is here today. Generating it on the fly, based on actual motions will have to wait.

          • If it is serious or not is a totally different measurement than if it is creeper shit. People who aren't creepers, are still not creepers when they're joking around.

            It is a pointless way to be defensive; you have a much greater need to learn what makes you a creeper than to impress me or convince me you're not. You should care more about yourself and not at all about me.

            And no, there is absolutely no fucking need for the computer to understand your emotions. The humans are supposed to do that part.

    • Or sexting. "Hi, what face are you wearing right now?"

    • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      Why bother when you can have actual sex with your celebrity-look-alike sexbot, or your VR sex sim?

      The copyright claims are going to be epic when celebrities start complaining that the 'bots look too much like them.

  • by Camel Pilot ( 78781 ) on Monday December 11, 2017 @05:57PM (#55720013) Homepage Journal

    Pictures or it didn't happen... oh wait.

  • by DatbeDank ( 4580343 ) on Monday December 11, 2017 @06:01PM (#55720041)

    I've been noticing this weird as hell incest porn overtaking the "most popular videos" sections on major porn sites as of late.

    All of these are entirely fake. There's no real step-siblings or mom/stepson actually videotaping this crap. It's all actors talking bullshit or just a couple just lying for click bait.

    This sucks because incest (even if it's fake shit) is a massive turn off. It's becoming a huge nightmare to find good milf/cougar porn because all of the actresses have migrated into this fake incest crap.

    • It isn't fake incest, it is just incest-related tags on the website that have become popular.

      It isn't intended to imply actual incest, or videos that involve roleplaying incest; just like, "teen" means "looks under 35" or at least "all wrinkles covered with makeup." Everybody knows that thirty-teen is not a real number.

      Also on the internet, "technology news" doesn't mean "news about technology," it means "business news about companies with consumer electronics or computer-related products." Same thing; prob

      • It isn't intended to imply actual incest, or videos that involve roleplaying incest;

        What? Yes, it absolutely is intended to imply videos that involve roleplaying incest. You really do have to wade through stacks of incest porn to get to anything else right now. I have only conducted an informal study, but it seems to be dominated by aunt-nephew, then sister-brother, then uncle-niece. It implies something fairly disturbing about our culture that this is what's blowing up, especially since the last trend to blow up in porn was MILFs. So let's see, mothers I want to fuck, incest porn... a sic

        • by swb ( 14022 ) on Tuesday December 12, 2017 @08:04AM (#55723527)

          I think it's just a sign that the era of free and unlimited porn is causing porn itself to lose luster, and they're just going after weirder and weirder fetishes to try to keep people interested in what amounts to the same mundane sex that rehashes the same sex positions. Shuffle around the various positions and then the obligatory cumshot.

          It was luridly appealing when it was uncommon, now it's just banal. And so much is made with so little creativity or passion that you have to attach increasingly weird tags to it to attract viewers, otherwise people are just tired of it.

          What's funny is I've seen the same videos tagged multi-posted with different tags. One tag says "incest" the other says "teen with older guy". I mean, it's all the same with different titles.

          WRT incest, I'm sure it's one of the socially "prohibited" fetishes with broad appeal. There are probably enough people who have thought about sex with a relative (close or distant) that you can make find people willing to watch either because they've had the idea or they're just bored with everything else.

  • What? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by glenebob ( 414078 ) on Monday December 11, 2017 @06:08PM (#55720095)

    This article seems to imply that there are people who are surprised by this. People actually didn't see this coming years ago?

  • The Virtual Actors Guild. Your characters need to bw fully registered and licensed and of corse you need to have your union dues fully paid.

      Because once porn has pioneered this technology, real actors are going to quickly be in muchj lower demand.

    • The Virtual Actors Guild. Your characters need to bw fully registered and licensed and of corse you need to have your union dues fully paid.

      The Virtual Actors Guild? ... The VAG? I’ve been trying to figure out if, given the context of the article, that was a deliberate joke or not!

      • The Virtual Actors Guild. Your characters need to bw fully registered and licensed and of corse you need to have your union dues fully paid.

        The Virtual Actors Guild? ... The VAG? I’ve been trying to figure out if, given the context of the article, that was a deliberate joke or not!

        Some of both. The Virtual Actors Guild on the Internet National Agency would be a dead giveaway...

  • by ToTheStars ( 4807725 ) on Monday December 11, 2017 @06:21PM (#55720183)

    I see the editors have been cursed by the Rouge Angles of Satin!

    I hole-hardedly agree, but allow me to play doubles advocate here for a moment. For all intensive purposes I think you are wrong. In an age where false morals are a diamond dozen, true virtues are a blessing in the skies. We often put our false morality on a petal stool like a bunch of pre-Madonnas, but you all seem to be taking something very valuable for granite. So I ask of you to mustard up all the strength you can because it is a doggy dog world out there. Although there is some merit to what you are saying it seems like you have a huge ship on your shoulder. In your argument you seem to throw everything in but the kids Nsync, and even though you are having a feel day with this I am here to bring you back into reality. I have a sick sense when it comes to these types of things. It is almost spooky, because I cannot turn a blonde eye to these glaring flaws in your rhetoric. I have zero taller ants when it comes to people spouting out hate in the name of moral righteousness. You just need to remember what comes around is all around, and when supply and command fails you will be the first to go. Make my words, when you get down to brass stacks it doesn't take rocket appliances to get two birds stoned at once. It's clear who makes the pants in this relationship, and sometimes you just have to swallow your prize and accept the facts. You might have to come to this conclusion through denial and error but I swear on my mother's mating name that when you put the petal to the medal you will pass with flying carpets like it’s a peach of cake.

  • by CaptainDork ( 3678879 ) on Monday December 11, 2017 @06:25PM (#55720213)

    ... and that should make everyone nervous.

    Nervous is OK as long as it also makes people horny.

    That's the point of porn.

    As for "fake," it doesn't matter as long as it's satisfying. There are lots of role-playing sites.

    And as for "fake," as in "fabricated evidence," detecting "fake." is within the scope of digital forensics.

    Let's file this with Hawking's AI phobia, alright?

  • Long before AI was ever an idea in someone's mind, Edgar Allen Poe wrote : Believe none of what you hear and half of what you see. This idea is even more applicable to this fake porn. Who the heck is going to believe it if it even YOU! Just blame it on the AI (or the dog).https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/252780-believe-nothing-you-hear-and-only-one-half-that-you
  • by jader3rd ( 2222716 ) on Monday December 11, 2017 @06:25PM (#55720223)
    Now once someone produces a tape of Donald Trump have sex with Russian prostitutes while married, he'll be able to claim that deepfakes created it and is innocent of everything. This will be the greatest tool for people weaseling out of video evidence.
    • by HiThere ( 15173 )

      That wouldn't be a crime in the US, because he was in Russia at the time. So evidence only needs to be good enough for PR.

      The question is "Did he do it?", and I really don't care. I despise him for things he admits, so anything additional doesn't really matter...unless it can be pinned on him as a crime. Even then...would I really prefer Pence? Spiro Agnew used to be called Nixon's insurance policy.

  • Good! It'll probably be the first time for a lot of you.

    Be careful with your replies. My son reads slashdot and posts here.
  • It's about time we stopped judging a picture by its pixels alone.

    We already have the situation in art and archaeology that nothing is considered real without provenance. Perhaps provenance will become easier to fake. Never fear, for this problem, there's always the blockchain.

    The far more interesting aspect of this is the impact on trafficking in child pornography.

    What are we going to do? How does one legally demonstrate the apparent age of a digital model? Connect a jury of thirteen convicted paedophiles

Nothing recedes like success. -- Walter Winchell

Working...