Support NeoGAF

[Hashmal_Bringer_of_Order]

I'm amazed more people arn't talking about this. Firstly, here are a couple of links. Note that while they have a editorial bias, they cover the basics well enough and are SFW. Finding the real deal is a easy google search away.
https://www.theverge.com/2018/1/24/...-face-swapping-artificial-intelligence-reddit
https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/bjye8a/reddit-fake-porn-app-daisy-ridley

Using advanced "AI" training, the program(s) can match and splice different pictures and videos with unerring accuracy. While the obvious use people have found is for porn, it also has fascinating implications for both SFW entertainment (as seen in the edited Rogue One clip) and also in the realm of "fake news" and beyond. What does everyone think of this?

 

[Razorback]

I think it's fascinating. This is still early days, but eventually, we'll have to rethink everything we take for granted about video evidence. The implications for Hollywood are pretty interesting as well. It reminds me of the movie The Congress where the plot revolves around the actress Robin Wright playing as herself in the future, selling her digital image to a studio so they can keep making movies with her forever without her involvement.

I notice in this example that both still look fake because they applied the deepfake effect on top of the CGI animation. So the facial movements give it away. If the effect had been applied to a real actress, it might even beat the expensive ILM version. Maybe not this early version of the software, but let's wait a couple of years and see where it's at.

 

[Gavin Stevens]

Saw some of the porn ones earlier today when I read about it. Some of them are understandably bad, but a few are so good it’s unreal.

Give this tech a little while and you will see it used in a lot of places, from stunt doubles, to reshoots, to...

No just porn. It will all be porn. I’m ok with that.

However what I was NOT ok with was the face swap of Lois lane from Man Of Steel with Nicolas Cage...

NIGHTMARE FUEL.

 

[OrionFalls]

That would explain why I saw a Maisie Williams ‘sex tape’ on Twitter...

 

[dyergram]

I realise this is probably going to be just porn and Nicholas cage gifs however I was thinking in a couple of years we could get awesome biographies with this tech obviously they would still have shit screenplays but at least the people would look right.

 

[caffeware]

Spoiler

AI corrupted.

 

[Scopa]

I saw a demonstration of similar technology 1-2 years ago, but it was generated live by an actor and had perfectly synced mouth and face movements. In real time. They did a demo of Trump before he was President and it was so lifelike it was unreal. I wish I knew where to look for the videos again.

This has scary implications well beyond porn.

EDIT: Here you go.

 

[Mahadev]

https://gfycat.com/YearlyNewBarb


Everyday we stray further from God's light.

 

[BANGS]

I saw a demonstration of similar technology 1-2 years ago, but it was generated live by an actor and had perfectly synced mouth and face movements. In real time. They did a demo of Trump before he was President and it was so lifelike it was unreal. I wish I knew where to look for the videos again.

This has scary implications well beyond porn.

EDIT: Here you go.

That effect looks obviously fake to me though... like when you see an animal talk in the movies... and not good ones like Jungle Book but budget ones like Santa Buddies and shit...

 

[Rocket Number 22]

I saw a believable Sansa Stark on reddit the other day and a Gal Gadot that was...a little strange (they used her face in this weird morman thing where she had to undress in front of her prospective husband)

Still waiting on Tom Hardy.....

 

[Scopa]

That effect looks obviously fake to me though... like when you see an animal talk in the movies... and not good ones like Jungle Book but budget ones like Santa Buddies and shit...

Obviously we can spot the imperfections, but I don’t think it looks as fake as you are suggesting. Besides, the point is, if it looks this good now (and this video is 2 years old), imagine what they will have very soon. Technology moves at lightning speed. What they could do with this technology is disturbing.

 

[macfoshizzle]

so crazy how technology and AI is now. you can't believe anything on TV anymore.

but more importantly, how is this going to be used for porn?

 

[Scopa]

so crazy how technology and AI is now. you can't believe anything on TV anymore.

but more importantly, how is this going to be used for porn?

I’m gonna guess that one day (soon), you’ll go to your favourite streaming site and they’ll be a list of celebrity names and body types. You click on one of each and hey presto. It is inevitable.

 

[macfoshizzle]

I’m gonna guess that one day (soon), you’ll go to your favourite streaming site and they’ll be a list of celebrity names and body types. You click on one of each and hey presto. It is inevitable.

I guess there's already Gal Gadot's face on some porn stuff.

 

[natjjohn]

I guess there's already Gal Gadot's face on some porn stuff.

The deep fakes site is loaded on reddit. They are disturbingly convincing the good ones (once seeing the article did a quick peek and there's a Katy Perry one that you would swear was real)

 

[Sakura]

Could I use this to put myself into movies

 

[Koala Driving a Ferrari]

Could I use this to put myself into movies

I like the way you think.

BRB, rushing off to transpose my face over Arnold Schwarzenegger's in Terminator 2.

 

[llien]

Besides, the point is, if it looks this good now (and this video is 2 years old), imagine what they will have very soon.

It doesn't work like that with lots of tech. Very often, last 5% cases of the problem can easily take 500% more time to solve.

 

[Marky Mark]

The Michelle Obama final version is pretty crazy.

 

[Scopa]

It doesn't work like that with lots of tech. Very often, last 5% cases of the problem can easily take 500% more time to solve.

Looking at the advancement of cgi over the past 20 years. It does move that quickly in this case imo. I’m of the opinion that if this is the tech we are allowed to see, then the tech that is behind closed doors would be extra impressive. I’m not saying it’s perfect, but I am saying it’s damn close. And again, the implications are massive.

 

[llien]

Looking at the advancement of cgi over the past 20 years. It does move that quickly in this case imo. I’m of the opinion that if this is the tech we are allowed to see, then the tech that is behind closed doors would be extra impressive. I’m not saying it’s perfect, but I am saying it’s damn close. And again, the implications are massive.

Well, why, look at CGI Rachel in the latest Bladerunner.
But that's not runtime and with some manual work:

https://vimeo.com/249369342

 

[Scopa]

Well, why, look at CGI Rachel in the latest Bladerunner.
But that's not runtime and with some manual work:

https://vimeo.com/249369342

I don’t get what your point is? Could you state it?

 

[llien]

I don’t get what your point is? Could you state it?

My point is, we are not quite there yet.
And CG is about 50 years old by now.

 

[Scopa]

My point is, we are not quite there yet.
And CG is about 50 years old by now.

Of course. I never said we were there yet. I said, I think we are very close, one reason being the demonstration I posted and the implications of that technology.

I still don’t understand your point in that context.

 

[Razorback]

My point is, we are not quite there yet.
And CG is about 50 years old by now.

The thing is that this deepfake algorithm is not at all like traditional CGI. No artists are involved. This app was made by just one guy that was messing around with neural networks. You can only imagine what companies like Google can do behind closed doors.

 

[llien]

Of course. I never said we were there yet. I said, I think we are very close, one reason being the demonstration I posted and the implications of that technology.

I still don’t understand your point in that context.

OK, remember Terminator 2?



That is from 1991. How long did it take us to get to "CG actors in short scenes"?

The thing is that this deepfake algorithm is not at all like traditional CGI. No artists are involved.

I get that.
All I'm expressing is merely my opinion that it can be much farther away, then it looks.

 

[Scopa]

OK, remember Terminator 2?



That is from 1991. How long did it take us to get to "CG actors in short scenes"?


I get that.
All I'm expressing is merely my opinion that it can be much farther away, then it looks.

I think you are missing the point.

 

[BANGS]

I... I don't think he is...

 

[lifa-cobex]

Could I use this to put myself into porn

ftfy

 

[Kadayi]

Kind of crazy. Watch some stuff out of curiosity. Obviously early days with the tech and I dare say it will improve dramatically as it iterates, however, it's clear that for effective face swaps you need people with similar features and jawlines are of key importance.

 

[DryvBy]

This has been a thing for a long time. You can do this kind of thing quickly using FaceSwap Live on your phone to see how FakeApp works.

 

[Sapiens]

I love all the indignation and pearl clutching at this. Nice Streisand effect being created thanks to all the fake outrage.

 

[Kadayi]

I love all the indignation and pearl clutching at this. Nice Streisand effect being created thanks to all the fake outrage.

I think there's reasonable concern from the perspective of it being a tool for creating revenge porn, though in truth I'd say based on what I've seen, the footage does require one to suspend one's disbelief and the uncanny valley is ever present. However, this stuff will get refined and that threshold will be conquered. No point crying over spilt milk though, it's happened, where it goes and to what extent, who can truly say.

 

[Phoenix RISING]

Interesting how responses are overwhelmingly negative.

 

[Trogdor1123]

Lol, I tried to find stuff on Reddit... I have no idea how that place works

Edit: After looking at Reddit in general for a few minutes i feel like it's not for me... Makes me scared im going to click on something I can't unsee...

 

[choco-fish]

The quality of what I’ve seen is poor, it’s clever tech but I think it’s a long way off the point where it could really fool anyone. the clips I’ve seen were average quality which I think helps hide the limitations of the tech. The fakes seem more like lookalikes than a 100% likeness and you seem to get artifacts, halo effects and some uncanny valley around the faces, not sure they could fool anyone at this point. Could have scary repercussions as the tech improves I guess.

 

[llien]

Makes me scared im going to click on something I can't unsee...

Now there are two of us. Dayum.

That on top of it being quite poor quality.

 

[Trogdor1123]

Now there are two of us. Dayum.

That on top of it being quite poor quality.

Haha, I know. I will just take people's word for it.

 

[davepoobond]

What’s it called where they take game character models and make them have sex? I think that’s probably weirder.

 

[llien]

Pornohub doesn't find it amusing, takes banhammer.

 

[BANGS]

Pornohub doesn't find it amusing, takes banhammer.

Well that's just ridiculous...

 

[Alx]

Well that's just ridiculous...

Makes sense actually, the celebrities could sue the platform for broadcasting their image without authorization, like victims of revenge porn would.

 

[BANGS]

Makes sense actually, the celebrities could sue the platform for broadcasting their image without authorization, like victims of revenge porn would.

Not really. The images of the celebrities are public images. You can't sue anybody for using them. Revenge porn suits are made because that person never authorized those videos/images for public use...

 

[Alx]

Not really. The images of the celebrities are public images.

I very much doubt they are. If Nike used CGI to include a celebrity face in an ad without paying him/her a dime, that celebrity would sue and win. Their image is the opposite of public, it's their livelihood. It can only be used through a contract signed with them.

 

[BANGS]

I very much doubt they are. If Nike used CGI to include a celebrity face in an ad without paying him/her a dime, that celebrity would sue and win. Their image is the opposite of public, it's their livelihood. It can only be used through a contract signed with them.

I guess the line of profiting off such a thing is a grey area. There are videos on youtube now that are monetized using celeb's faces in the same way and nobody is suing. I'm interested in seeing where the precedent is set for this...

But the images themselves are certainly public. I guess the use of them does fall into a grey area...

 

[Hashmal_Bringer_of_Order]

In recent news, after this got big enough, Reddit and most other sharing sites are hard at work trying to ban both the content itself and most discussion of it. Must have hit a nerve...

 

[BANGS]

In recent news, after this got big enough, Reddit and most other sharing sites are hard at work trying to ban both the content itself and most discussion of it. Must have hit a nerve...

This world never ceases to amaze me... and not always in a good way...

 

[BadHand]

When the pee tape hits: "Deepfake News!"

 

[Scopa]

In recent news, after this got big enough, Reddit and most other sharing sites are hard at work trying to ban both the content itself and most discussion of it. Must have hit a nerve...

About time. Clearly a Russian trick to distract us from some election somewhere.


/s

 

[davepoobond]

When the pee tape hits: "Deepfake News!"

When the deep state meets fake news