Thanks ahead of time for your feedback

  • originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    157
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    4 months ago

    i think its ‘barrier to entry’

    photoshop took skills that not everyone has/had keeping the volume low.

    these new generators require zero skill or technical ability so anyone can do it

    • Gigasser@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      17
      ·
      4 months ago

      Ehhhh, I like to think that eventually society will adapt to this. When everyone has nudes, nobody has nudes.

      • Ephera@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        Unfortunately, I doubt it will be everyone. It will primarily be young women, because we hyper-sexualize those…

      • kent_eh@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        You might think so, but I don’t hold as much hope.

        Not with the rise of holier than thou moral crusaders who try to slutshame anyone who shows any amount of skin.

        • Gigasser@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          4 months ago

          I like to be optimistic, eventually such crusaders will have such tools turned against them and that will be that. Even they will begin doubting whether any nudes are real.

          Still, I’m not so naive that I think it can’t turn any other way. They might just do that thing they do with abortions, that is the line of reasoning that goes: “the only acceptable abortion is my abortion”, now changed to “the only fake nudes, are my nudes”

    • Sanctus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      69
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      Scale also, you can create nudes of everyone on Earth in a fraction of the time it would take with Photoshop. All for the lowly cost of electricity.

    • GreatAlbatross@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      4 months ago

      imho, not dissimilar to model planes>drones.

      To operate a model plane, there was a not-small amount of effort you needed to work through (building, specialist components, local club, access to a proper field, etc.).
      This meant that by the time you were flying, you probably had a pretty good understanding of being responsible with the new skill.

      In the era of self-stabilising GPS guided UAVs delivered next-day ready-to-fly, the barrier to entry flew down.
      And it took a little while for the legislation to catch up from “the clubs are usually sensible” to “don’t fly a 2KG drone over a crowd of people at head height with no experience or training”

    • Toes♀@ani.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      16
      ·
      4 months ago

      Have you tried to get consistent goal orientated results from these ai tools.

      To reliably generate a person you need to configure many components, fiddle with the prompts and constantly tweak.

      To do this well in my eyes is a fair bit harder than learning how to use the magic wand in Photoshop.

    • HobbitFoot @thelemmy.club
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      4 months ago

      It would also take a lot more effort to get something even remotely believable. You would need to go through thousands of body and face photos to get a decent match and then put in some effort pairing the two photos together. A decent “nude” photo of a celebrity would probably take at least a day to make the first one.

    • AbouBenAdhem@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      When Photoshop first appeared, image manipulations that would seem obvious and amateurish by today’s standards were considered very convincing—the level of skill needed to fool large numbers of people didn’t increase until people became more familiar with the technology and more vigilant at spotting it. I suspect the same process will play out with AI images—in a few years people will be much more experienced at detecting them, and making a convincing fake will take as much effort as it now does in Photoshop.