Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

An AI-Powered App Has Resulted in an Explosion of Convincing Face-Swap Porn (vice.com)

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the stranger-things dept.

Samantha Cole, reporting for Motherboard: In December, Motherboard discovered a Redditor named 'deepfakes' quietly enjoying his hobby: Face-swapping celebrity faces onto porn performers' bodies. He made several convincing porn videos of celebrities -- including Gal Gadot, Maisie Williams, and Taylor Swift -- using a machine learning algorithm, his home computer, publicly available videos, and some spare time. Since we first wrote about deepfakes, the practice of producing AI-assisted fake porn has exploded. More people are creating fake celebrity porn using machine learning, and the results have become increasingly convincing. A redditor even created an app specifically designed to allow users without a computer science background to create AI-assisted fake porn. All the tools one needs to make these videos are free, readily available, and accompanied with instructions that walk novices through the process.

37 of 222 comments (clear)

  1. FINALLY by Mike+Hock · · Score: 3, Funny

    My OPRAH PORN dream is coming true !!

    --
    ---lame
    1. Re:FINALLY by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Hillary pegging Bill for the nightmare win.

    2. Re:FINALLY by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      LOL. All of the narcissistic people who put their pictures online are going to suddenly start appearing in gay porn videos.

    3. Re: FINALLY by rsilvergun · · Score: 2

      I was a full to think people would want naked pictures of Whoopee Goldberg...

      --
      Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    4. Re:FINALLY by Cajun+Hell · · Score: 5, Funny

      Forget Bill; imagine the forbidden love of Hillary and Donald overflowing, spilling its star-crossed passion all over your screen.

      --
      "Believe me!" -- Donald Trump
  2. The only downside I see to this ... by damn_registrars · · Score: 2

    ... is that people who are procuring illegal (in particular, kiddie) porn could then hide behind the response of "I thought it was fake". If it went the other way though and actually destroyed the child and exploitative porn market then it would be mostly for the better.

    --
    Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    1. Re:The only downside I see to this ... by eth1 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      ... is that people who are procuring illegal (in particular, kiddie) porn could then hide behind the response of "I thought it was fake". If it went the other way though and actually destroyed the child and exploitative porn market then it would be mostly for the better.

      It goes a lot deeper than that. For example, now that I know this is so easy to do, if I'm ever on a jury, I can't really consider any video evidence as enough for a criminal conviction, unless it has a documented chain of custody.

      Likewise, any video that would normally cause public scandal can be dismissed as, "oh, it's fake!" even if it isn't, which might actually be a net benefit for public figures and those in power.

    2. Re:The only downside I see to this ... by swb · · Score: 2

      There's already a plethora of porn with short, skinny and flat-chested barely-legal women dressed and acting like barely post-pubescent girls, and that's *actually* fake, or at least the 18 US xxxx notice that says they're over 18 says it ought to be fake.

      I'm not sure how swapping faces does much to solve kiddie porn other than masking who the actually abused kids are, or worse, using the aforementioned skinny young porn actresses and putting real kids' faces on them.

      I suspect that *this* is actually the Black Mirror aspect of this -- it will become simple to put the woman at the office, your wife's sister, the babysitter, etc, onto a matching porn physique and then vicariously enjoy watching "her" get banged.

      Except these will leak out and it will become difficult to explain "it's not really me". We think exploitation via sexting pics or sex tapes is bad, it's got to be worse when it's not just a nude selfie but a realistic depiction of your wife/daughter/friend getting double-penetrated by two giants.

    3. Re:The only downside I see to this ... by MightyYar · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Incorrect. If I simply overwrite data, it's gone - it is irreversible. The simplest example is setting a pixel to black; the algorithm is completely lossy - you can never reconstruct the original pixel.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    4. Re:The only downside I see to this ... by fph+il+quozientatore · · Score: 2

      Why do you think so? As soon as this tech goes mainstream, it's going to be easier to explain "it's not really me", not more difficult.

      --
      My first program:

      Hell Segmentation fault

    5. Re:The only downside I see to this ... by charliemerritt03 · · Score: 2

      You are right down to identity - who when where, even she did WHAT? Thank you Equifax, your spilling "identity kits" onto the black market has accelerated the need to re think just How do you know it is ME? Fake video and Equikits will have an unexpected large effect on all society.

    6. Re:The only downside I see to this ... by TFlan91 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Education. Good, quality education. Giving citizens the ability to discern with genuine rational what to consider and disregard whatever is in the public eye.

      You may not like the idea, but it really is the only solution to almost all of our modern day problems.

    7. Re:The only downside I see to this ... by war4peace · · Score: 2

      Maybe it would finally knock sex off its high pedestal and trivialize it enough to become just ordinary entertainment, like watching a movie or having supper at a restaurant. At the same time, it would hopefully unlink sex and deep feelings, because currently if someone's banging his wife's best friend it's a huge scandal, even though they're simply doing it for fun.

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    8. Re: The only downside I see to this ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think he's watched CIS too many times.

    9. Re:The only downside I see to this ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      People are not educatable in this regard. Look at all the people who say that Trump hates women, minorities, muslims, etc. No amount of education can convince people not to believe the worst about someone they have been convinced is evil.

      Further, some people truly are extreme. You cannot use logic based on typical human behavior to know what an extremist would or would not actually do. Hitler was literally having human beings killed in ovens. That is very extreme and out of character for any normal person's actions.

      Right now, there are Americans of all education levels who would believe it if someone told them Trump was having people thrown into ovens. How would you propose educating such people that this was not the case after they had just seen a well-made faked videos indicating otherwise?

    10. Re:The only downside I see to this ... by dkman · · Score: 2

      Not likely.

      All it is is "legalizing morality". America has a deep-seated history of doing that stupidity.

      Although we've made some steps in the right direction there are a lot of people trying to fight it.

      --
      I refuse to sign
    11. Re:The only downside I see to this ... by CaptainDork · · Score: 2

      Of assistance, would be studying the law.

      A lot of child porn legislation mentions "depiction," as a crime.

      So, whether real or fake, if it looks like child porn, it is.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    12. Re:The only downside I see to this ... by HornWumpus · · Score: 2

      Choosing to bang your 'wife's best friend' (which is an old English euphemism for your junk BTW. Cite: Python 'Isn't it awfully nice to have a penis...'), of all the women in the world, tells me that you already have 'deeply hurt feelings' and are trying to cause as much pain as possible.

      Her sister on the other hand.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    13. Re:The only downside I see to this ... by Cajun+Hell · · Score: 3, Funny

      Incorrect. If I simply overwrite data, it's gone - it is irreversible. The simplest example is setting a pixel to black; the algorithm is completely lossy - you can never reconstruct the original pixel.

      Uncrop.

      --
      "Believe me!" -- Donald Trump
    14. Re:The only downside I see to this ... by martinX · · Score: 2

      Although the opposite seems to be the case:
      http://thehill.com/opinion/whi...

      --
      When they came for the communists, I said "He's next door. Take him away. Goddam commies."
    15. Re:The only downside I see to this ... by denzacar · · Score: 4, Funny

      but it's still not easy to deny a compelling faked photo.

      Most of them will be quite easy to deny, simply by finding and presenting the original porn video.

      Of course, that will require extensive knowledge of porn lore... or a video-frame-recognition algorithm with access to a database of all the porn ever made.
      But until such algorithm is released to the public... it is up to us, ordinary humans, to take on the thankless job of porn forensics.
      It's a dirty job. But that's what the tissues are for.

      --
      Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
    16. Re:The only downside I see to this ... by Solandri · · Score: 2

      that people who are procuring illegal (in particular, kiddie) porn could then hide behind the response of "I thought it was fake".

      Even fictional visual depictions of child porn are illegal.

      (c)Nonrequired Element of Offense.â"
      It is not a required element of any offense under this section that the minor depicted actually exist.

      If it looks like a child and is porn, it's illegal. So "I thought it was fake" doesn't work as an excuse. The reasoning for this is that fictional depictions of child porn could create demand for more of it, which in turn could result in someone exploiting kids to make real child porn.

      Also note that in general, you have the right to control your own image. As such, if someone were to use said software to generate porn that looks like you and distribute it, they would be in violation of your personality rights. At the very least you could get them to stop distributing it. At the most you could sue them for damages. The only loophole is that many countries do not recognize personality rights for dead people. So you might be able to get away with generating and distributing fake porn of dead celebrities.

    17. Re:The only downside I see to this ... by mjwx · · Score: 2

      People are not educatable in this regard. Look at all the people who say that Trump hates women, minorities, muslims, etc. No amount of education can convince people not to believe the worst about someone they have been convinced is evil.

      Ahh, you have this backwards... To achieve your deification of Trump, you need more ignorance, not more education. Education tends to lead people to making logical conclusions based on evidence and actions, its ignorance that makes them believe things that aren't true. Fortunately for you, its easier to make people more ignorant than educated, the tool you need is Propaganda.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
  3. Oh the Humanity! by mykepredko · · Score: 4, Funny

    Let's see who we wouldn't want to be able to visualize (in any way) having sex:
    - Ernest Borgnine
    - Marty Feldman
    - Either of the Olson twins
    - Steve Buscemi
    - Vincent Schiavelli
    - Whoopi Goldberg
    - Christopher Walken
    - Clint Howard
    - Jack Elam
    - Madonna

    I'll skiip the obvious political ones.

    --
    Mimetics Inc. Twitter
    1. Re:Oh the Humanity! by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I did some, err, research, for science... And it turns out that you need to find a model who looks kinda like the celebrity and video which doesn't show their face at odd angles it can't cope with for it to work properly.

      I can see a new industry starting up, with look-a-like porn stars who produce videos specially shot to suit face replacement.

      As well as celebrity lawsuits I expect there will be a lot of blackmail and kids in court for putting a classmates face on some porn.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    2. Re:Oh the Humanity! by chill · · Score: 2

      Step 1: Using free 3D software, such as Blender, download a generic "head" wireframe model.
      Step 2: Map the straight photo onto the 3D model.
      Step 3: Rotate the model to a few odd angles, then render realistic stills.
      Step 4: Use the soon-to-be-updated software to use multiple images you now have to create a more realistic face swap.

      --
      Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
  4. Re:"free" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    From the article:

    The subreddit’s wiki states that FakeApp is “a community-developed desktop app to run the deepfakes algorithm without installing Python, Tensorflow, etc.,” and that all one needs to run it is a “good GPU [graphics processing unit, the kind that high-end 3D video games require] with CUDA support [NVIDIA’s parallel computing platform and programming model].”

    So this now seems independent of TensorFlow.

  5. The Veracity of Video is Dead by imperious_rex · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Face swapping in porn vids is a cute trick, but it doesn't take a genius to see the implications of this technology, especially when combined with synthetic voice technology being able to accurately impersonate anybody's voice with just a 1 minute sample. If you thought Photoshop fakery for political gain was bad (for example, the darkened pic of OJ on the cover of Time or the fake John Kerry/Jane Fonda pic from the 2004 election), we're now on the verge of a new era of video fakery for spreading lies, disinformation, and smear campaigns. It used to be said that "pictures never lie" but Photoshop put an end to that (yes, I know photo manipulation has been practiced for decades in the analog age, but it was generally beyond the capability of the average person). With video, the best one could do was to use clever editing to discredit somebody (as happened to Shirley Sherrod). Not anymore. Now anybody can make a scandalous video. If these deepfakes can be done by one person with a desktop PC, what can an organization with deep pockets accomplish?

    1. Re:The Veracity of Video is Dead by jep77 · · Score: 2

      Alibis and Evidence and, depending on who's driving, it'll be the best thing since sliced bread or the most evil thing since... well, evil things.

    2. Re:The Veracity of Video is Dead by Tom · · Score: 2

      I'm thinking that is potentially a good thing. It will end the era of "omg scandal video". A leaked video will no longer have the potential to ruin someone's career, as it could be real or fake and we will likely never know.

      It might also end the despiccable professione of the paparazzi. You don't need to hunt celebrities around the world for that one blurry sunbathing-topless picture - anyway nobody will believe it's real.

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    3. Re:The Veracity of Video is Dead by KozmoStevnNaut · · Score: 2

      If these deepfakes can be done by one person with a desktop PC, what can an organization with deep pockets accomplish?

      You should actually be asking "what have they already done?"

      --
      Eat the rich.
  6. Can't wait by NEDHead · · Score: 4, Funny

    Trump's head, Putin's body, Ivanka, and Bannon waiting his turn

  7. Re:"free" by Hal_Porter · · Score: 2

    Don't worry. We Kremlin trolls use TensorFlowski, the Russian version.

    --
    echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
  8. Re:I'm going to lose my dinner... by hey! · · Score: 2

    I read an article by a data analytics guy for an online dating company in which he noted that while there was a positive correlation between attractiveness ratings of profile pictures and attempted contacts, profile pictures with the greatest variance in ratings got the most interest of all.

    In other words your best bet is not to be conventionally pretty, but to appeal strongly to unconventional tastes.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  9. Guaranteed. Someone will reface a porn movie with by tgibson · · Score: 3, Funny

    political figures and rename it "Deep State".

  10. Slow clap and slowly back away and out of the room by millertym · · Score: 2

    Adding this to my "The unibomber was right" list of proofs.

  11. easy for CSI by Chrisq · · Score: 2

    what about CSI though?

    They would zoom in to the character's eyeball showing a reflection of the original studio and photographer. They would then zoom in to the camera lens in this picture showing the original scene from which the imposed face was taken, showing it was fake.

    As an encore they would find a "fingerprint of the computer" used to manipulate it, look up the IP address of this and then track it to a particular room in a house. If it were CSI Miami Horatio Caine would arrest the computer user with some cringe-worthy comment like "You thought you could make it look like Oprah was cuming, but now the law is coming for you".