Spanish agency created AI influencer and she's raking in up to $11,000 a month | Hacker News Reader

Spanish agency created AI influencer and she's raking in up to $11,000 a month

fortune.com

66 pointssmusamashah62 comments

It would be great to know details about the resources spent and team involved less the AI. Most probably the AI is not the only "secret sauce" here.

Saying it another way: it will not work for most people and/or companies. D̵o̵n̵'̵t̵ try this at home.

The comments on the images are hilarious. So many (lonely?) men suckered in.

Stuff like this just doesn't scale well for IG (and similar services).

At some point, it will be trivially easy for everyone to make hundreds of such fake profiles and then IG will be inundated with it, drowning out the real-world content.

Oh noooooo. Not the real content on IG!

lol :)

There is plenty: https://www.instagram.com/purpleportofficial/

Though IG has a strong recommendation algorithm. If a user stops interacting with AI generated posts, it will stop recommending them. So you could be in a recommendation algorithm world with 0 AI generated content if you were able to discriminate well enough against AI generated posts.

It's a good target for automation given how "samey" a lot of the content is.

Since pretty much all of this so-called "content" is indeed pure BS and garbage, I for one welcome disrupting this influencer industry to the pieces.

The “AI” is just the visual stills. A human still has to craft the strategy, write the content, feed the model new fashion and generally be “influential”.

At the moment, it seems like a net loss.

Also, Im all for "AI", but in my logic this is fraud.

This is just what the post truth world looks like. All audio, video, and photography will be suspect and assumed to be AI in the next decade.

I wonder if humanity will regret the change in the coming decades.

I already do.

Where's then frontier between marketing and fraud when using simple tools like Photoshop?

Those skin product ad where the image of the skin is so flawless should be classified as fraud.

But soon it won't be photoshopped because the flawless skin would have been generated by some AI just like some ads that use 3d avatars.

My partner is a professional photographer with large brand beauty clients, so I know all to well the extent of change from the raw image to the final release... To me, its a fine line, and just because some monkey wants to toy with photoshop as a career doesn't mean they can ignore all ethics. More so after all we have learned about the FRAUD of self worth and body image being pushed on young people, particularly young women.

There was a similar one done by a Finnish advertising agency:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-12336293/Stu...

While this story is great advertising for the agency, these images are not subject to copyright, are they? [0]

It would be a shame if a competing agency used them in a disparaging way, with no compensation due to the anti-human advertising agency.

[0] https://www.reuters.com/legal/ai-generated-art-cannot-receiv...

How are consistent facial characteristics achieved? Wouldn't every image have slight variations that break the illusion?

People also look slightly different based on lighting and makeup. I'm guessing a LoRA trained on someone's face would be enough to get it consistent. Considering that people can make fakes with celebrity faces fairly consistently, I suspect the same technology can be used here.

There's probably someone sitting and picking out output as well, to get the best ones that keep with the desired image.

One of the tricks is to mix and match genders of known celebrities. E.g. A portrait a model that looks like Female Robert Downey Junior and Male Kim Kardashian.

Generation will be kind of consistent but still unrecognisable.

I imagine quite a few OnlyFan's accounts are just AI.

unlikely. Unless someone is specifically seeking AI onlyfans, I don't see how a normal person cannot instantly tell that its an AI.

a lot of people don’t care

many would far rather be entertained by an AI than pay an actual human (woman) for company

many people view the latter as failure, while viewing the former as just entertainment no different than buying hentai manga or adults only computer game

same with placating their partners. “Oh this onlyfans is just AI there is no woman I’m interacting with”

and there is an exception to Section 230 immunity where site operators can be liable for user generated content if its possible a human was sex trafficked, obvious AI that is erotic doesnt have this problem as there is no human, leading to a more favorable business environment

I can see it being impossible to compete with very quickly, especially if the AI is always saying the right things and producing content quicker

long GPU manufacturers and gpu cloud providers

Project Melody was a thing, although that was perhaps closer to a controlled vocaloid than a true AI.

It seems AI porn is its own niche at most. It's not replacing anything, mostly just feeding negative training data for human GAN, for both generation and discrimination.

I read that as OF requires a credential verification, people are failing to try that.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38397404

Ageless, no complaining, no whining, no crying, just working overtime 24/7.

I wonder if this will create a boom and replace influencers except for those who do live shows which this wouldn't work for until robots arrive trying to do this.

The dystopia is moving fast and cheapening every industry.

I don’t think too many will mourn the loss of influencers.

Only the influencers that won't get any more money.

As soon as they're able to produce 100% realistic videos, it's over.

I wonder if everyone left at the agency will be happy when AI replaces them too.

More discussion here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38397404

Are people actually paying for this as AI, or is it basically fraud at this point, ie people are paying for the girl, assuming she's real.

How do you keep the AI so consistent with the face and the hair? In my experience it's always generating different things.

Midjourney blend tends to be stable.

My guess is that they have a 3D model and are using AI to make it look realistic.

My guess is that they have a real model and AI is everything else.

Does this violate any of the social media terms? I wonder if they will just ban this at some point.

They're getting a piece of the pie, no? I wouldn't be surprised if they were also doing it.

Why would they if it increases engagement? They encourage other technologies, such as “filters” that create images loosely based on your appearance.

Giving accounts to people that don’t exist is not much of a distinction from how people currently use it.

Meta’s already added their own versions with celebs to instagram. The pictures of the people are not AI-generated but all the interactions are with a chat bot.

See https://inspiramarketing.com/metas-ai-powered-celebrities-re...

no-paywall link https://archive.is/aluJT

Women seem to be less susceptible to such fakes.

Not at all.

https://www.cbsnews.com/miami/news/fake-romeo-charmed-more-t...

Women are probably an easier target if anything. Just pretend to be rich, handsome and famous: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-12409699/Woman-th...

Yeah, but they don't seem to be interested in having "AI boyfriends".

Not if they know they are AI.

You think? Let's put a Chanel purse and Jimmy Choo shoes on an AI and see if we can sell some luxury jewelry.

Back in the day such scammers were frowned upon.

Back in the day when the human models were full of silicone and the photos were full of photoshop?

Only stills, no video?

Are you complaining about the speed of the Singularity?

This is more about CGI than about AI.

> influencer agency The Clueless was only inspired to design her because they found real-life models and influencers too unreliable and difficult to work with.

hilarious

No strikes. No opinions (refusal to appear with other content). No diva behavior. Just a cog doing what’s expected.

It may be some years off but eventually video content will move toward synthetic actors and actresses. Some real actors will remain but will be a minority. People still go to see live plays.

>People still go to see live plays

That’s where holograms come in.

Technology seems to turn everything into cottage industries eventually.

Problem is that it hollows out the middle and all that's left is either expensive niche stuff or mass produced synthetic crap. Wood furniture is a good example today.

It's doing the same thing with employment and society in general.

Hollowing out middle class jobs and the middle class itself. And as we see, it won't stop there. Doctors, Lawyers, Programmers are all on the chopping block as well.

That is historically quite ironic given how cottage industry was the early industry before factories disrupted them. Of course you could call work from home coding cottage industry too.

Yes, but it does not cover the other minor benefit: not having to pay the talent.

Also getting 11k a month

Hmmm, but did we all skip over a very important issue?

Are the gen AI images subject to copyright?

They aren't are they? [0] So could a competing agency use these images in their own campaign without compensation?

Or, is doing some Photoshop work like adding a background, or color grading enough to make the work copyrightable?

ChatGPT 4's summary on the matter does not "think" that just changing a background is enough. [1]

[0] https://www.reuters.com/legal/ai-generated-art-cannot-receiv...

[1] https://chat.openai.com/share/400042fa-b97d-4be7-b715-ac8db7...

That's a really interesting point I hadn't considered.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com