/hell/ - internet death cult

> They're calling it a violation of their favorite streamers' dignity even if you would never meet that streamer.
I believe they are correct.
Just as a human being, the very concept of it disgusts me. You may call me a boomer for that if you wish. It's a further evolution of the twisted Celebrity Culture that I already despised and wanted to escape.

Isn’t the hype over. I have seen a lot of fake porn being shared a while ago, but that somehow stopped.
Maybe there is a missing aura in fake porn.

I think this thread might be /hell/ material considering the subject matter.
I wouldn't have anything against it if it was only used by individuals for sexual fantasies, but it doesn't take a vivid imagination to think about the potential for blackmail, harrassment, lawfare, and defamation that comes with deepfake technology. Not to mention, it'd be awful to come across porn where your face is pasted despite you having never recorded any porn. I really, really don't like this technology. If world governments (and especially the US government, considering that a large part of AI tech is coming from Silicon Valley) were willing to regulate it, maybe I wouldn't.
In general, I despise the way our society uses AI. It could be a next step in automation and save people so much time at work, but it's only being used to generate value through weird scams.

If you put your personal information online you shouldn't be surprised when it's abused. I didn't anticipate fake AI porn but still, us dinosaurs were right to be paranoid.

>>4312
A British streamer recently filmed herself sobbing about seeing her face pasted on a porn star's body and how it gave her body dysmorphia, and how a computer violated her, etc. I've also been informed by the discourse that generated porn like pic related will replace women.

Porn sucks. I don't know why people feel the need to push boundaries even further. It's all wrong and unhealthy for all involved.

>>4316
Drinking beer is also unhealthy, but hey, it's tasty and fun!

>>4317
Yeah, porn is neither.

>>4311
Completely agree. Just because I don't know the person being wronged doesn't mean they aren't being wronged. This isn't even a case of parasociality, it's just basic human empathy.

It IS a violation of dignity— for everyone involved. Something like this happening to me would be my greatest nightmare.

>>4311
same.
People are being reduced to a plastic imitation of themselves that they never played a part in. Parasocial relationships, deefakes, porn, social media, it's all built to reduce you to a digital clone lacking the soul and nuance that makes you a person. It's like what happened to Lain in serial experiments lain, or what happened to the girl in perfect blue. We've become distorted into idols and images of ourselves, lacking our personhood and substituting it with pretty colours and on-demand consumption. We've become products, campbell soup cans of ourselves!

I might not be human, but I can't imagine a system that can be more dehumanizing than all of this crap!

>>4315
Women aren't just objects for sex buddy…

>>4314
If you happen to pass by someone who is taking a recording on their phone, then your face is already in a database somewhere or online. You'll be surprised how much information about you is online, even if you've never touched a computer…

>>4314
as an average joe used to say
it is all good and dandy until you do something extremely retarded
like try to rob someone, or punch someone in the supermarket.

>>4321
I think it's an inherent flaw in any system that brings such large groups of people together. Goes back to the "monkey circle" idea that people are only really able to keep track of a few dozen other people in their circle, certainly less than 100. Beyond that, people are reduced to "others" who are identified only by labels. It's like how if you go to a big sports game, everyone will be wearing colors or labels of their favored team so you can easily identify other fans who have the same interests as you.

The internet brings such vast numbers of people together, I don't think it's possible for online communities to exist without reducing people to labels, outside of maybe some very small groups.

I only watch anime pornography, so I would have no idea. If it happened to me (if I were a big streamer), I wouldn't even know either since I wouldn't bother looking it up. I'm not a woman either, so my view would be skewed anyways. Interesting how we can now tarnish the dignity of a person without directly confronting them or saying anything to them. It's a great, dangerous power.

I think deepfake porn is pretty cool and just an extension of current A.I. tech progression, it was bound to happen. People care too much about their image plastered onto another’s body. In reality the deepfake porn will not be attached to them irl as the sense of self was not violated, unless they take it as the truth.

There's a lack of empathy in this thread from certain posters. I don't necessarily blame these posters from feeling this way as I think it's great that they haven't had life experiences that would contextualize these things for them, but it gives me a bleak feeling. If we can't get an average dude on the internet to understand why deepfake porn is a fundamentally emotionally eviscerating thing to go through, it makes me worry about getting anyone to understand more nuanced gendered issues and associated fuckall that interfere with my life every single day. Hot damn.

>>4327
"Bound to happen" as in, "someone was going to try it no matter what"? Yes.
"The sense of self was not violated" Fundamentally wrong.
"People care too much" That's subjective.
"The deepfake porn will not be attached to them IRL" Also fundamentally wrong.

Right now it's expensive, so you're only seeing this happening to big streamers and public figures. *Still fundamentally wrong* and public figures do not consent to this by being public figures, but regardless. Soon it won't be so expensive. Soon, it will be someone you know.

An inevitable stepping stone in grappling with the ethical implications of this technology absolutely, but absolutely nobody benefits from this application, not even the consumers. Everyone hurts.

>>4328
What is society supposed to do with the overflow of empathy in this situation? Certain posters can keep seething over deepfake porno devs if it helps coping. It’s only possible to change your own reaction to events, not another’s, so why not try to enforce one’s self fortitude?

>>4329
They're just asking for some posters to acknowledge that it's problematic for women (which, it is.) No need to criticize them.

>>4328
>associated fuckall that interfere with my life every single day
I mean, you are saying that your baggage is special. That, or you're wishing your experiences upon everyone who hasn't had to go through something similar.
Overall suffering will only increase, but it's not like you care about what's morally wrong when you're the one having fun.

I'd hope that sex and everything that has to do with it would become less of a horrible, convoluted social construct. No need to feel bad for anybody if nobody's soul is getting hurt because of the opinion clusterfuck regarding the basic natural things that human lust and naked human body are. No need to fear the consequences if there is nobody to bully and shame you for a picture of your face with somebody's cum on it. This sort of thing generally shouldn't be a trigger to switch public opinion of you to some bad state.

I'd also hope that the death of said construct would destroy the "it harms kids" narrative in regards to pedophilia, maybe bringing the actual arguments like "I don't want a hag to make love with my son" or "I don't want to relinquish control over my children to some weirdo" to light.

But these days, even the words like "man" and "woman" are made a mess of. And it's not only the weird academia guys and those willing to change sex to something more attractive who do things like that. Think of the various 4ch/a/n opinions on what the word "loli" should mean, for example.

Although it greatly primitivizes things, I'd say the higher order problem here is that the social contract of the old culture is not dead yet. It's like a dangling half-severed arm that causes terrible pain and that you can't bring yourself to completely tear off. Many would want that arm back, and it's not like I totally can't understand why. Take the Christian concept of purity that demonizes lust, for example. Many would reject it, but still prefer a virgin maiden over a former whore, after all.

As for the empathy, I wish there were some for those who lust. Demanding that people be chunks of slate that feel nothing and, if feel, do not do anything about it is kind of objectifying as well. Although I usually dislike this buzzword.

>>4328
>Soon, it will be someone you know.

I had a crush in high school who I kept in touch with as a friend into college, but when I finally made a pass at my first love in college she rejected me and I haven't seen her since. I still find the memory of her hot for fantasies, and if I had some pictures I might have like to have made a deep fake for personal use.

There was also a movie about a guy who made a realistic sex doll of his wife right before she died of illness, so he could keep making love to her after she died. So I could see deepfakes used like that by old people and widows.

>>4333
How do you think she would feel if she knew you jerk off to fantasies of her?
It's gross man, move on.

>>4334
There's a reason most people don't make it publicly known what they jerk off to, and it's because most people would find most of it "gross". Fantasizing about a specific person you're attracted to is completely normal and as long as you aren't making it public then who cares. I guess making deepfake porn of said person feels a little weirder to me but as long as they are only making and consuming it in private I again don't think it's an actual issue. I think >>4332 had a good point about demonizing sexuality.

I just can't see the idea of reducing people to objects of sex as moral or good. Too many people seem fine with it because it isn't affecting them (to their knowledge), and because they see it as a benefit to their own fantasies. AI porn will further reduce empathy, isolate, and make people slaves to their own passions.

Maybe that's just my "old fashioned" Christian sensibilities talking, seems like the "right" thing to do is turn a blind eye to blatant exploitation…

In any case, this topic is not comfy for anyone, and should be moved to /hell/.

>>4332
wow! this isn't very comfy my sushi

>>4337
Honestly this thread is long overdue for a boot to hell. Asking sushis to open up about their philosophy of porn never could have gone well.

>>4330
This is what I was trying to convey. Thanks, sushi.

>>4331
It's the exact opposite of that, actually. My "baggage" is experienced by a huge amount of people on this planet, because they are systemic gendered issues. I bring them up because they are so widely experienced but simultaneously rarely understood. Here we are having a conversation about superimposing people's faces onto porn without their consent, and everyday people can't decipher why it might be detrimental to the people they are using.

For me, this is simple to understand. I don't wish my struggles upon you, but I do want you to draw upon your own struggles and experiences to help you understand what these people are experiencing.

>>4332
I think I agree with the underpinnings of what you said. "Sexuality should not be demonized". That's totally true.

I'm not sure I agree with the way your discussion reframes the hurt experienced by those targeted with deepfake porn, though (or kids, holy shit)

Chiefly, while sex isn't something to be ashamed of, to be "grossed out by", or to hide and make taboo, the removal of said taboos doesn't inherently also remove the deeply emotional and personal component of sex and sexuality.

Giving people the choice to populize or discuss their sexuality is great, and while it can be *reduced* to a transaction, it is not a transaction by default. "I make you feel good and you make me feel good" undermines much of what happens to the body and psyche during sex. It is an exchange of trust, sometimes it is an exchange of power, and often it is an intimate process of emotionally understanding and connecting with another person.

This is why when someone oversteps that boundary, when they do something we aren't ready for, when they don't listen to you and they do it anyway, it's a crime. It has the capacity to destroy people. It regularly does. (Kids do not have the vocabulary to understand these experiences nor the base of experiences. Adults placing them in sexual situations robs them of autonomy they don't yet have.)

By accepting this, we do the opposite of reducing people to chunks of slate. We give humanity to sexual actions, and we make it possible for conversations to be had about how to experience sexuality healthily, the same way we talk about managing and embracing our sadness and happiness.

Sex is personal for people. "It shouldn't be personal, I'm gonna share porn of you anyway! It's just a video, right? No impact on the 'real you' at all" is blatant disregard of a person's humanity. That is, blatantly, objectification. You reduce them to an object for your use.

>>4333
I think this a weird thing to do *personally*, but yeah, I don't have the right to patrol if you use deepfake video tech in your personal life to construct this video and never share it online.
And if that guy is going to make a doll in the image of his dead wife, again yeah while I might think that's weird as fuck, maybe it's the only thing keeping him together? He doesn't need to tell anyone about it, so great.

But that's not really the issue at hand here. People fulfill their fantasies in private all the time. Things change when suddenly these videos and images online, they are of *you*, and thousands upon thousands of people are suddenly watching them. Do what you want on your hard drive in your own time, but keep it to yourself when it comes to the lives of real people.



I wish new posters would spend a little bit more time on the boards before dropping a fat one. It's always possible to make a post *in* hell, after all.

>>4338
yeah there's a reason i hide posts from hell lol
i don't wanna hear ANY shit undermining the damage child sexual exploitation does - this debate is a waste of time

>>4340
also i agree with >>4311 on this, yall need to stop treating women as subhuman ffs

Love it, watch it all the time. Fully support uwu

>>4339
>I wish new posters would spend a little bit more time on the boards before dropping a fat one. It's always possible to make a post *in* hell, after all.
You see, my friend, if this was 2014 sushigirl we'd make deepfake porn of undoall on /hell/.

>>4339
>everyday people can't decipher why it might be detrimental to the people they are using

I can assure you this is a concept even normalfags can grasp, as group empathy is a core moral of theirs. Open up any mainstream social media and you’ll see a clear line drawn between. Some decide to draw awareness to the issue in order to spare others from potential grievances, while others choose to ignore. I don’t think the posters are ignorant, there is just no incentive or obligation to care.

>>4343
we've evolved, sushi

I think it's fine. It isn't real after all.

>>4337
Oh, sushi roll. Sometimes so hated and sometimes so deeply beloved. I usually do not post anything here, and that makes me more of an alien to this place, so you don't have to take my opinion too close to your heart: my stances aren't that strong, except those that I have about the relationship between children and adults. These were strong when I was 8, when I was 14, when I was 18, and so they most likely will be until I die.

Besides, I also wanted to make the following point. While we, of course, can upkeep the *traditions of old*, the advent of new technology won't stop, and so won't the change it brings to humanity. The humanity has changed already, although I'd have a trouble describing in what way exactly it did so. Once upon a time, people wouldn't stare at their phones during a holiday dinner and would talk to each other, bringing in many guests, and many still do. Once upon a time, there wasn't an issue with porn because there were no cameras to catch and keep a detailed image of a person, and porn simply didn't exist the way we know it. The perception of fake erotic photos being published somewhere as blasphemy upon one's dignity is one way how the *puritan romantic mind* of the *old culture* tries to make sense of this brave new world that we're treading into. And it's poorly suited for processing that.

Although, you could probably make the case that humans always disliked evil caricatures and gossips of them as well as name-calling and exposure of their secrets, and that things are still going the usual way because fake lewds are simply a new annoying part of this list of things that, although their contents are not necessarily real, sometimes really make people feel terrible.

>>4339
There is the classic problem of freedom for something versus freedom from something. Some people will do whatever, and when confronted, they say that they don't owe anybody anything, they say that if you don't like something, you could just go away or grit your teeth, and it's totally your fault if you can't or don't. Some people demand that every moral actor in the world be mindful of them, the whole set of their wants and opinions and what they might feel at each step, or else. As for the solution, it depends.

Sex doesn't have to be inherently tied with anything, nor does it have to specifically be something. Sometimes, sex is just an exchange of money. It can be a result and a part of a long cuddly romance as well as a quick shag. Sex… is sex. Your talk of people not understanding the related experiences implies that there is but one valid way to process them and that unless a person does that, he doesn't understand these experiences. And that is wrong, I think.

I wanted to argue something about the difference between disregarding one's humanity and one's feelings, whether there is always the need to be pedantically mindful of them, whether any kind of will towards a human being is objectifying them. But it turns out that I don't really want to, and I think that you, at least in some way, understand.

In other words, I'd hope that people would take it easier. Instead, some people make such a big deal off of anything lewd about them and the others, and I wish people would be able to experience petty lewd stuff like fake porn pictures in a simpler way that doesn't wrench anybody's heart and thus doesn't result in violation of either of the two freedoms.

I hope this is much clearer than what I wrote before.

THANK GOD THIS THREAD WAS MOVED, NOW I CAN FINALLY IGNORE IT

>>4347
> although their contents are not necessarily real, sometimes really make people feel terrible.

Holy shit, he figured it out.

>>4357
Kek!

I'm gonna deep fake a boot on your ass

I'm gonna deep fake a smile on your face, sushibaka.

>>4322
they sure try their hardest to act like it

>>4459
they just be lookin for attention
even if it is degrading towards them in the end

>>4459
>>4460
Your isolated experiences with women do not represent the entire group!

Stop it!

>>4462
Of course it doesn't.
It just does for a feeeew of them.

Whatever happened to using your imagination?

>>4462
ALL 3d is pd

>>4310

im very ugly so if someone would make deepfake porn of me i would be very fluttered