Hacker News Reader

If your image if your income, having it defamed via a deep fake or the image rights, aka copyright is only fair. Can't understand why anyone would not back a creator. So many on here are themselves working to create a unique creation that they can live off of.

View on HN

A human impersonator, clearly labelled as such, probably wouldn't have received the same treatment. These videos were simply computer-assisted impersonations.

A difference in quantity can become a difference in kind.

Consider a situation down the line where your phone can do this in real time, and at a quality that is hard for the untrained ear to distinguish from the genuine article.

It's not at all clear to me what the right thing to do here.

Me neither. Companies have been sued when they use impersonators in their ads, but individual impersonators are generally left alone (excepting that they license any songs etc by those they're impersonating)

Doing things computationally allows a scale that humans alone can't achieve, and as you said that may make all the difference.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com