--------------------------------------------
        Deep fakes
        2018.01.27 21:10:56 CET
        --------------------------------------------
       
        It seems Deep Fakes are becoming more and more popular. Today I saw
        three articles about it online, one TV news show discussion and at
        least two Tor hidden sites dedicated to the production and sharing of
        Deep Fakes.
       
        If you don't know what a Deep Fake is: it's the product of using some
        of the most modern artificial intelligence techniques to replace the
        faces of pornographic actresses with other faces, therefor producing
        a "Fake" pornographic video. For example, placing the face of a
        famous Hollywood actress on a porn video. Similar to Photoshop'ing a
        face on a picture, but with videos, and with excellent technical
        quality.
       
        Unless the fake images are used for profit, I am unaware of any laws
        which make them illegal - in other words, the images by themselves
        are not illegal, but if you sell them or make a profit, then you
        could be in trouble. But by the tone of the conversation online and
        on TV, it seems this won't be the same with fake videos.
       
        Another difference besides the media format is the ease of
        production. A few days, some freely available software, sample
        pictures, some patience and anyone could produce a fake video, with
        *anyone*. I think this is the reason why people are so scared and I
        understand them.
       
        But I get *extremely* concerned every time new legislation is proposed
        in response to new technology. Much more concerned than someone
        producing and sharing a fake porn video with my face or my wife's
        face.
       
        No one can deny people have used mental imagery of strangers for
        sexual pleasure for a long time. If someone produces deep fakes for
        their own consumption, how is this different than mental imagery? If
        the problem is the potential for sharing the end-product, then we are
        opening a can of worms for the future, when brain-to-brain interfaces
        are possible - or even if you extend the idea of freedom of speech as
        the transmission of ideas. If one can explain to someone else the
        sexual imagery they use, "sharing this content" freely, how is this
        different than sharing deep fakes?
       
        I can understand the fear of deep fakes and I need to think a lot
        more about this issue, but my knee-jerk reaction is to be against any
        legislation to make deep fakes illegal.