Thoughts on the rise of Deepfakes?

Thoughts on the rise of Deepfakes?

Other urls found in this thread:

pornhub.com/view_video.php?viewkey=ph5a6e76796908a
youtube.com/watch?v=rTawFwUvnLE
youtube.com/watch?v=HN9NRhm9waY
rt.pornhub.com/users/milolug
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

best thing to happen for fake porn since adobe...

or I guess macromedia...

it is all part of a deep state plan to cover up evidence of politician sex abuse scandals before they break

I'm already saving lots of video and image material of coworkers, friends, cashiers at the supermarket and hundreds of others who I secretly mindfucked and soon my fantasies will be '''''''''''''''real''''''''''''''

Nice! i.m trying to learn but fin ding it tricky o know what I need to use the program

...

...

How have I not heard about this? Apparently this shit is extremely popular.

well, are there any good ones?

Looks like Tay tay. Suase?

YES WE CUM

no sauce, but its another fake, there other ones that exist but I'd have to edit them down to fit on Sup Forums

It is her face put on a ponstar's body using new ai techniques. I think the model is Krystal Boyd.

back to the swamp with you beats!

i think katy perry really does that.

Could I get a link please kind sir. Purely for research purposes. That may or may not involve beating the he'll out of my dick

So when are you gonna post the porn with hot celeb bitches and not these boring ass skanks?

pornhub.com/view_video.php?viewkey=ph5a6e76796908a

new ai techniques ???

Mother of yes. Thank you

is a bit like face app and things like that, using machine learning to photo shop every frame of a video

...

sauce? Also its cool, but I would love to see more non-porn related applications.

I have no sources, I know not the original video

Yeah, someone re did the dead people in rouge one, it was pretty good

They are giving feminists and numales ammunition against places like this, where freedom of speech still lves. But worth it

correct me If I'm wrong but isn't that whole "princess Leia" deep fake completely disingenuous since they did a fake on an already made fake (cgi) that guarantees that it's going to not look fucked up since a lot of the hassle is trying to match faces and facial structure.

It's was a pointless thing to make that people are saying is amazing. Sure, it's still really good looking but, it was done without the hassle and technical difficulties of a regular deepfake.

yes, but its still an improvement which is still good.

really I think regular deep fakes could do with some more video editing to make it more believable, if people could make fake cg heads it'd be even better

people are using it for this as well

She's so pretty!

No it's a big deal. Not because of current performance but because of where we are going. In particular capsule networks combined with generative adversarial networks are going to take this to the next level.

It will improve the interest of the public towards convolutional neural networks and digital image processing. I'm already seeing in the future people praising this initiative as the thing that helped the implementation of autonomous cars.

holy fucking shit i love this

This could be used for truly cool stuff.

Think ST:TNG "Unification II".

I think it's going to demonetize and destroy the entertainment industry but to the benefit of all. Copyright may mean nothing in the near future.

that scene with her in space had me uncontrollably laughing in cinema. Right up there with jar jar

Can you define capsule networks?

Also generative adversarial networks?

Also "the next level?"

Google them and read about them. Don't be a lazy nigger.

yea wtf does he even mean?

>Thoughts on the rise of Deepfakes?
Boring spam is boring spam.

probably just bs isn't it?

No they're real.

machine learning you double niggers

>Can you define capsule networks?
Capsule networks are better at seeing things in an ordered way without needing to be hard coded. Convolutional neural networks are good at finding features such as an eye or mouth but often can't map those things together in space.
>Also generative adversarial networks?
There are many kinds of generative adversarial networks but they all involve pitting two networks against each other. The first network modifies something and the second network tries to tell if the new image was generated or genuine.

Now I do a classic uni student and claim this as my own words next time I need to sound smart

She also reminds me of Katilette/Colette, youtuber and wife of Shaycarl, which is good cause she's a total hottie milf.

I liked Man of Steel but geez, Zack Snyder needs to get a colourist who doesn't have red/green deficiency.

youtube.com/watch?v=rTawFwUvnLE
youtube.com/watch?v=HN9NRhm9waY
It's a rapidly growing field. Very exiting time to live in.

very exciting time to meme my friend

I'll actually put that on my watch list btw

Man of Steel was awful.
If you're a fan of the character, it shits all over him.
If you aren't, the movie makes no sense, because so many emotional plot points rely on the comics to explain things.

Case in point; Superman killing Zod was positioned like some big, character-breaking moment. As if Superman had to break one of his major beliefs.

Except, at no point in the movie did they establish him as being staunchly opposed to killing.

Plus, literally everything that happened was his fault. Zod chased him to Earth for the codex which was never brought up again.
Even his dad committed very slow suicide by refusing to run from a tornado to... punish Clark for having powers?

Should have been titled 'The Man of Steel Cleans Up His Own Mess'

In the Snyderverse, Lex Luther was right. Superman IS a menace.

Out of the blue question you seen Dead Poet's Society?

Yeah, watched it in High School.
I thought it was pretty good - plus Baby Wilson.

>If you're a fan of the character, it shits all over him.
>If you aren't, the movie makes no sense, because so many emotional plot points rely on the comics to explain things.
You're fucking retarded. There's nothing in the film you wouldn't understand if you've never read superman. It's not your comic book superman, it's a new take on the concept.
Manchildren like you, obsessed with shitty comics are a cancer on humanity, actively inhibiting good stories from being told.

>Except, at no point in the movie did they establish him as being staunchly opposed to killing.
No, he's just a regular farm boy who's never killed anyone. This is proof of your retardation. People don't just randomly decide that killing people is easy. You don't need to establish a rule to be against killing before it's realistic for you to hesitate in killing anyone.
You'd know this if you weren't autistic

No Zach, you're a shitty director who is shitty with zero ability to establish characters or develop personalities.

You only care about the big explosions and epic scenes, at the expense of pacing, plot, and internal story logic.

You wanted Superman to be like Nolan's Batman. But Superman ISN'T Batman.
Superman is hope and optimism. Batman is objective realism.

That's why Batman v Superman was such a let down; what was SUPPOSED to be a battle between two forces for good with conflicting ideologies was instead two grumpy emo superheroes crying over their 'Marthaaaaaas'.

Plus, ending on Superman dying despite the fact it was obvious he'd be alive in the next movie is just a cheap cop out.

A simple minded idiot like you doesn't understand complex concepts like 'narrative structure' or 'establishing character motivations' though.

>no response to any of the arguments
>barrage of ad hominem attacks and unsupported assertions
Yep, seems like the average butthurt basement dwelling manchild who was pissed off that MoS and BvS were proper films and not generic capeshit

I explained exactly why the movie sucked; pacing, characterisation, internal logic.

You called me;
>fucking retarded
>manchild
>retarded (again)
>autistic

You don't actually know what ad hominem is, do you?

Because stating reasons, then claiming the director is shit for those reasons, is not ad hominem, even if you disagree with my opinion.

Saying "No you're dumb retard" IS ad hominem, which is pretty much what you did.

Let me throw a spanner in your little rant though; I don't even read comic books.
I don't give a shit about comic accuracy; my contention is that they're relying on the pop culture status of their heroes to full in the blanks that they don't put in the films.

DC saw the billions of dollars Marvel was making, said "oh shit, we're late to the party," and rushed through their films without bothering to establish their world or characters.

The one exception is Wonder Woman, which although still flawed (she defeated Ares in 1918? So what happened to WW2?), at least by being set before Clark was even born, means it couldn't possibly be Superman's fault again.

rt.pornhub.com/users/milolug

Here are all the good ones.

Your welcome faggots.

It's better than most of the trash posted here. I'd rather have them posted then garbage that's on Sup Forums

...

There wasn't a single argument in your entire post. You are objectively a manchild
>and rushed through their films without bothering to establish their world or characters
Except BvS has far better written and established characters with depth than any of the two dimensional MCU characters. Not that comparing it to another franchise would affect its quality, for the record
>my contention is that they're relying on the pop culture status of their heroes to full in the blanks that they don't put in the films
But you're wrong because they're not. The one example you gave (his no killing rule) was fucking retarded and you didn't respond to that because it's really obvious what a shit argument that was.
Give me another example of them relying on information not in the films for the story to make sense or admit you're wrong