this post was submitted on 22 Aug 2023
1 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

58083 readers
3104 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Each of these reads like an extremely horny and angry man yelling their basest desires at Pornhub’s search function.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (5 children)

I'm unconvinced by this attempt to create a moral panic. IMO nothing here is shocking or offensive once I remember that people could already use their imaginations to picture celebrities naked.

[–] ThetaDev@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago (4 children)

The main issue of this would be public defamation, i.e. wrongfully portraying someone as porn actor which might destroy their career. You cant really do that with written or drawn fiction.

But for that the pictures would have to be photorealistic, which is not the case just yet. But the tech is going to improve plus the generated images could be further manipulated (i.e. add blur/noise to the image to make it look like a bad phone picture).

[–] ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Once the ability to make photo-realistic images like that becomes commonplace, those images won't be evidence of anything anymore. Now I can tell you a story about how I had sex with a celebrity, and you won't believe me because you know I easily could have made it all up. In the future I will be able to show you a 100% realistic video of me having sex with a celebrity, and you won't believe me because you'll know that I easily could have made it all up.

[–] Savaran@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The obvious thing is that at some point any camera worth it’s salt will have a nice embedded key that it signs it’s output traceable to a vendor’s CA at the least. No signature, the image would be considered fake.

[–] gandalf_der_12te@feddit.de 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

As a programmer, I gotta say, that's probably not technically feasible in a sensible way.

Every camera has got to have an embedded key, and if any one of them leaks, the system becomes worthless.

[–] Turun@feddit.de 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

No, that would actually be feasible with enough effort.

The real question is what do you do if someone takes a screenshot of that image? Since the picture must be in a format that can be shown, nothing is stopping people from writing software that just strips the authentication from the camera file.

Edit: misread the problem. You need to get a private key to make forgeries and be able to say "no look, this was taken with a camera". Stripping the signature from photographs is the opposite of what we want here.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)