I tried to help a sex worker with ChatGPT and all it did was preach about avoiding sex work, further marginalizing in its virtue signalizing. I dont consider her marginalized, and “help” was just information about her job and techniques and venues. ChatGPT would have consumed this textual information too.
But yeah offline fine tuned models wont have this problem.
Kind of cool to see how the SWERF representation in tech is going to speedrun SWERF irrelevancy.
People are already setting up fake personas/OnlyFans accounts using chatbots and SD images.
We have a high-value specialist currently chatting up a few of them at work. His wife doesn't know. He doesn't know we know. The photos are fake but he's too horny to notice.
Time to dust off the "there are no women on the internet" meme...
Does it matter, though? I mean the fact he has a wife but he thinks he's interacting with a real person is bad, but the falseness of their existence isn't an issue. As a furry I can tell you that my subculture and a lot of others out there don't care if a character is fake and doesn't exist. Hell even someone physically roleplaying in the bedroom is playing a character that doesn't technically exist.
I'm only offering an early anecdote that catfishing is adapting to the times. You don't have to believe me. Don't trust anyone with weird nipples that hides their hands in every photo.
The link you provided is an example of somebody making a "catfish" account on a "social media site". It's not an example of somebody "setting up fake personas/OnlyFans accounts using chatbots and SD images". Yes, men have been pretending to be women online since the stone age, that isn't news. That's different from using chatbots and SD images to maintain online personas.
Look, if you want professional reporting, wait a year or two and you can hear about it from mainstream media.
You're being weirdly defensive about this-- you've even gone full FAKE NEWS on me in a sibling comment. I admit I am completely unqualified to recognize what it looks like when a clueless Boomer is talking to an Oobabooga+sd_picture_api instance over WhatsApp. This is my first day on the job.
No "proof" coming from me is ever going to satiate you (I'm not a credible source), so I'll pass. Just go on believing that there are women out there who will send you endless nudes of themselves having superimposed nipples stacked on top of each other but get bashful about showing hands or feet (just say the magic words: "show me ___"). Believe that there are 18-year old e-thots out there whose underbaked features look exactly like the product of 15- to 20-step DDIM. Believe that they also have a developmental disorder that makes them say gibberish or change the subject when you reference anything to do with the current time. Believe that any of these women are real and actually interested in your two-timing ass. You'll get your "proof" the fun way.
> You're being weirdly defensive about this-- you've even gone full FAKE NEWS on me in a sibling comment
Huh? Sibling comment responded with a link to a story. I never questioned the legitimacy of the linked story. I questioned the relevancy of the story, fully assuming that the story is true. Then I even walked back my earlier comment and I wrote a new comment giving more credit to the posted story. Not sure how you read through these and hear "FAKE NEWS" in all caps.
If I went "FAKE NEWS" on something, it was your comment claiming "People are already setting up fake personas/OnlyFans accounts using chatbots and SD images". That's a thing that could theoretically happen in the future. It's not a thing that's happening at this time.
Your link does not support the claim I was asking the citation for. A chatbot service marketed as a chatbot service is distinctly different from a fake online persona constructed with chatbot and stable diffusion. In particular, the "honest chatbot" does not have anything to do with AI-generated images, and it's not purporting a fake persona.
ah okay, I wasn't responding to show catfishing occurring, and I was responding on the subject of a non-human adult content creator making money by entertaining humans.
It wasn't clear to me that was your goal post as "fake" can be brevity and hyperbolic just as much as it can be about catfishing, and it also wasn't clear to me that the person you responded to was even pointing out anything relevant to this thread which was "casually talking in person with someone whose occupation is also sex work" being followed with "hey we have a guy at the office that thinks they're talking to sex workers! this person on hackernews must be a guy and just like him!"
so at this point, I would say we're too far down to really be invested in these nuances, but I hope you find what you're looking for
> I wasn't responding to show catfishing occurring, and I was responding on the subject of a non-human adult content creator making money by entertaining humans.
Sorry about the harsh response. Your link was on topic and it was indeed an example of non-human adult content creator making money by entertaining humans, albeit only in text form not images, and its popularity was dependent on marketing on the back of a real persona. There's still no documented case of John Nobody making a Jane Done AI with chatbot + generated images, and rising to any level of popularity. But the case in your link was definitely a step in that direction and I wasn't giving any credit for it in my previous response.
Wow, so I'm downvoted for asking for citation for a FALSE CLAIM, while nobody is capable of providing a citation that in any way supports that false claim.
But yeah offline fine tuned models wont have this problem.
Kind of cool to see how the SWERF representation in tech is going to speedrun SWERF irrelevancy.