Wouldn't put it past the teachers at THIS stage...
It's the environment they are raised in which is hyper sexualized. Back when I was an early teen, if I had AI I wouldn't do this, I'd be making cool art or storyboarding some cool story I thought of as when it can to sex it was less about quantity than quality of going out and being in a relationship.
A lot of that has been minimised and focused instead of promoting sexual gratification, not just by this but also by how many 'just turned 18' OF accounts there are nowadays...
Maybe it's a difference between a rural upbringing and a urban one or differences in family unit as I said, I wouldn't be doing this when I was a young teen and by the time your 17-18, what was the point?
You can make video offline with the Wan, Hunyuan, or LTX video models, using WanGP by deepbeepmeep or comfyui. There's no sound generation yet, but I'm sure it's coming. There are specific loras for different sexual acts, check out civitai.
There's probably a bunch of shady websites and apps that are repackaging these models as products for phone-only kiddies. Image alteration like "nudify" is pretty trivial.
If you just want "suggestive movements", grok imagine can generate a video in 15 seconds. They recently added a lot more moderation to it but people have been able to trick it by pasting anime images around a photograph.
Though he's kind of correct: Wan and Hunyuan are Chinese, LTX is jewish, and the stuff on civitai is from normal people, not tech companies. Stability AI and Midjourney were and are woke, and did try their best to stop people from generating pictures of naked women. It sounds like Grok does the same. I suggest it's not a coincidence that the video models that allow nudity are from non-western companies. So yes, you can do it, but only by bypassing silicon valley.
Grok is buggy. I have been able to get tons of nudity from it. Nothing hardcore but many suggestive videos too. Its very flakey deciding whether it moderates you or not, and sometimes it works better on the website than spp.
So is the issue that it’s using real images to make pornographic content? Or is it that kids are easily getting their hands on AI porn making tools (which is the biggest issue imo).
Minors having access is extremely bad no matter what
If you just pulled a picture of a person off of Instagram and made an ai video where they took their clothes off, should it be frowned upon? Technically nobody was hurt and the video created isn’t even real. But at the same time I would beat the fuck out of someone if they made a video of my daughter with AI.
Yes but you've got to rememeber that photoshop was a MASSIVE step up in the ease of creating fake images compared to doing it in a dark room. If anything the jump from photoshop to AI is a lesser change.
Laura Bates, the founder of the Everyday Sexism Project, says there is something particularly shocking about deepfake images. In her book The New Age of Sexism: How the AI Revolution Is Reinventing Misogyny, she writes: “Of all the forms of abuse I receive they are the ones that hurt most deeply – the ones that stay with me. It’s hard to describe why, except to say that it feels like you. It feels like someone has taken you and done something to you and there is nothing you can do about it. Watching a video of yourself being violated without your consent is an almost out-of-body experience.”
Once again a feminist proving she's completely detached from reality. They're fake, it's in the name. It's not real, it's no more violating than someone having a sexual dream about you. Then again she's probably the kind of woman who loves to attack men for things they literally just did in her dreams too, so I guess dreams are real to her. All this hysteric "It's so traumatic, I frew up!" bullshit is the real sickening part.
It's not traumatic, you're just weak children who love the chance to run up and demand more gibs for having an owie.
I expected a ham beast but it turns out that Bates is just an AWFL bong mid who has been grifting about catcalling on the streets of London for over a decade.
Good job being such a Karen, Laura, hectoring White men over imaginary microaggressions while your capital & motherland was conquered by mudslimes.
It was going to happen. Is it actually an improvement though? Eventually it becomes so ubiquitous that even real nudes are lost in the wash of fakes.
I’m sure something will happen to stop it, as most of the bad articles I see are about women either using them against other women or tricking teenage boys into sending them and then making them feel so bad they kill themselves. Anything that takes power away from women will be squashed.
It's going to be interesting once people can just generate porn on demand... and even more so if they can do it locally. No one would know what's real anymore. The whole industry would collapse.
A very large percentage of the canon of Western art, from Greco-Roman through the Renaissance through impressionism, etc., involves drawing attractive human figures.
How many nudes of Helen of Troy, Leta, Aphrodite, and so on have there been? That is like the fan art of today.
And, shockingly, many artists used REAL LIVE people as their models and inspiration.
There's pornographic graffiti in Pompei of real people.
What's your point? Your addiction to always-accessible video porn is totally normal and we should let kids have their views on sex influenced by whatever they come across on the internet? That's what I have to guess you're saying since you didn't state how anything you said is related to the post.
I guess I would say that I just don’t really care about deepfakes or people pearl clutching over it. It just seems obvious and self-evident that horny people are going to use it for that.
I would say it's far worse to attempt to draw a false moral equivalency between drawing idealized or sexualized pictures of another adult and raping kids.
Retards love to cry false equivalence. It's almost exclusively used by retards. As usual, this isn't actually a case of false equivalence. I was just showing the inanity of the logic that you appeared to express by a reductio ad absurdum. But I guess your reason for not caring was actually because you think there's nothing morally wrong with child porn and kids making porn of children they know?
Before photoshop kids used to cut faces out of pictures and tape them on a playboy pinup. If you photocopied it or something to knock the quality down it could be believable.
Guess they found something again they can use to force in digital ID, because you dont want kids doing that ofc... while they at it they should bann class photos too then. These could also be missused these days.
There is no reason to think digital ID could stop this ... So yes I can definitely see the government using this to force in digital ID. Just like whenever there is a school shooting. "The gunman used a pistol? This is why we need to ban AR-15s."
Good. I'd be doing the same if I was a kid. I'd probably offer whole videos for money to any who asked. I'd make fake accounts and spam porn vids of popular girls I didn't like on their socials. Whoever the female valedictorian was, I'd make a video of her fucking the principal for better grades.
Not surprising as Western education thanks to a leftist ideology in charge has been grooming kids for sexual activities at a younger age.
AI is only 5% the issue, we need to homeschool on mass to stop this.
Wouldn't that just lead to AI deepfakes of their mothers, aunts, cousins & sisters? /s
Only if the family is raised on soy!
Or from Alabama..
Are there a lot of Muslims in Alabama?
Even funnier the second time!
Are there a lot of Muslims in Alabama?
Even funnier the first time!
tfw phone posting
No need for grooming at age 13+ you get interested in that kind of stuff on your own. And that happens not just in western countries.
Wait is it ONLY 13+?
I still remember the stories of them getting kids in sexualised drag shows...
What has that to do with making AI fakes of classmates? They arent forced by their teachers to do that as far as I know.
Wouldn't put it past the teachers at THIS stage...
It's the environment they are raised in which is hyper sexualized. Back when I was an early teen, if I had AI I wouldn't do this, I'd be making cool art or storyboarding some cool story I thought of as when it can to sex it was less about quantity than quality of going out and being in a relationship.
A lot of that has been minimised and focused instead of promoting sexual gratification, not just by this but also by how many 'just turned 18' OF accounts there are nowadays...
Maybe it's a difference between a rural upbringing and a urban one or differences in family unit as I said, I wouldn't be doing this when I was a young teen and by the time your 17-18, what was the point?
it was called photoshopping. AI is just a trillion dollar way of advanced photoshopping.
But the word AI scares seniors more
I thought all the AI video producers were online and gatekept by woke tech?
How can you make a video offline?
You can make video offline with the Wan, Hunyuan, or LTX video models, using WanGP by deepbeepmeep or comfyui. There's no sound generation yet, but I'm sure it's coming. There are specific loras for different sexual acts, check out civitai.
There's probably a bunch of shady websites and apps that are repackaging these models as products for phone-only kiddies. Image alteration like "nudify" is pretty trivial.
If you just want "suggestive movements", grok imagine can generate a video in 15 seconds. They recently added a lot more moderation to it but people have been able to trick it by pasting anime images around a photograph.
Though he's kind of correct: Wan and Hunyuan are Chinese, LTX is jewish, and the stuff on civitai is from normal people, not tech companies. Stability AI and Midjourney were and are woke, and did try their best to stop people from generating pictures of naked women. It sounds like Grok does the same. I suggest it's not a coincidence that the video models that allow nudity are from non-western companies. So yes, you can do it, but only by bypassing silicon valley.
Grok is buggy. I have been able to get tons of nudity from it. Nothing hardcore but many suggestive videos too. Its very flakey deciding whether it moderates you or not, and sometimes it works better on the website than spp.
So is the issue that it’s using real images to make pornographic content? Or is it that kids are easily getting their hands on AI porn making tools (which is the biggest issue imo).
Minors having access is extremely bad no matter what
If you just pulled a picture of a person off of Instagram and made an ai video where they took their clothes off, should it be frowned upon? Technically nobody was hurt and the video created isn’t even real. But at the same time I would beat the fuck out of someone if they made a video of my daughter with AI.
Yes but you've got to rememeber that photoshop was a MASSIVE step up in the ease of creating fake images compared to doing it in a dark room. If anything the jump from photoshop to AI is a lesser change.
Once again a feminist proving she's completely detached from reality. They're fake, it's in the name. It's not real, it's no more violating than someone having a sexual dream about you. Then again she's probably the kind of woman who loves to attack men for things they literally just did in her dreams too, so I guess dreams are real to her. All this hysteric "It's so traumatic, I frew up!" bullshit is the real sickening part.
It's not traumatic, you're just weak children who love the chance to run up and demand more gibs for having an owie.
I expected a ham beast but it turns out that Bates is just an AWFL bong mid who has been grifting about catcalling on the streets of London for over a decade.
Good job being such a Karen, Laura, hectoring White men over imaginary microaggressions while your capital & motherland was conquered by mudslimes.
The dead smile plummets her down to the bottom. She looks like a visitor from No I Am Not Human.
Which is appropriate I guess with her penchant for infiltrating places and destroying people.
Good Lord. Her smile is like a fem Joker without the war paint.
She looks like she'd be a good choice for Martha Wayne if they ever make a live action flashpoint movie.
Laura Bates. Of fucking course. I wish the manosphere was as dangerous as she makes it out to be. She'd be in a hole somewhere if it was.
Feminists like her just want to make sure boys have to pay girls via onlyfans and not get their rocks off for free
It was going to happen. Is it actually an improvement though? Eventually it becomes so ubiquitous that even real nudes are lost in the wash of fakes.
I’m sure something will happen to stop it, as most of the bad articles I see are about women either using them against other women or tricking teenage boys into sending them and then making them feel so bad they kill themselves. Anything that takes power away from women will be squashed.
It's going to be interesting once people can just generate porn on demand... and even more so if they can do it locally. No one would know what's real anymore. The whole industry would collapse.
Not a fan of clicking on that but that was obvious that would have happened.
A very large percentage of the canon of Western art, from Greco-Roman through the Renaissance through impressionism, etc., involves drawing attractive human figures.
How many nudes of Helen of Troy, Leta, Aphrodite, and so on have there been? That is like the fan art of today.
And, shockingly, many artists used REAL LIVE people as their models and inspiration.
There's pornographic graffiti in Pompei of real people.
#LiterallyShaking
What's your point? Your addiction to always-accessible video porn is totally normal and we should let kids have their views on sex influenced by whatever they come across on the internet? That's what I have to guess you're saying since you didn't state how anything you said is related to the post.
I guess I would say that I just don’t really care about deepfakes or people pearl clutching over it. It just seems obvious and self-evident that horny people are going to use it for that.
What kind of morality is this? It's obvious pedophiles are going to rape kids, therefore I don't care about pedophiles raping kids?
I would say it's far worse to attempt to draw a false moral equivalency between drawing idealized or sexualized pictures of another adult and raping kids.
Retards love to cry false equivalence. It's almost exclusively used by retards. As usual, this isn't actually a case of false equivalence. I was just showing the inanity of the logic that you appeared to express by a reductio ad absurdum. But I guess your reason for not caring was actually because you think there's nothing morally wrong with child porn and kids making porn of children they know?
The problems start here.
How is this news? Its the evolution of sharing nudes from their classmates.
No, it's the evolution of photoshopping since it's still not real pictures/videos of those involved.
Sharing actual nudes requires them to exist and is therefore a step or few ahead of this.
Before photoshop kids used to cut faces out of pictures and tape them on a playboy pinup. If you photocopied it or something to knock the quality down it could be believable.
Guess they found something again they can use to force in digital ID, because you dont want kids doing that ofc... while they at it they should bann class photos too then. These could also be missused these days.
There is no reason to think digital ID could stop this ... So yes I can definitely see the government using this to force in digital ID. Just like whenever there is a school shooting. "The gunman used a pistol? This is why we need to ban AR-15s."
I'm more concerned about the teacher making porn of their students, to be honest.
Funny as fuck, lmao.
Good. I'd be doing the same if I was a kid. I'd probably offer whole videos for money to any who asked. I'd make fake accounts and spam porn vids of popular girls I didn't like on their socials. Whoever the female valedictorian was, I'd make a video of her fucking the principal for better grades.