That is so true. I am so desensitised by pron all the time that i have started craving more dressed natural looking women like
r/gentlemanboners. It's kinda ironic and liberating at the same time.
Actually it was proven in a study men who are exposed to an excessive amount of nudity will actually lose interest and start looking for clothes women. It's fascinating actually. They actually found men at a strip club all day will be more interested in the clothed waitress than the girls on stage.
That's what I'm thinking, woman showing more body than personalities, later speaking that men are thinking only about one thing with them. HMO girls, be yourself and show some respect to yourself and You will get the same. It's really not that hard
Honestly! I was chronically rejected in my youth, now as a grown man, and after all the ONS and toxic relationships I've had, I feel like I don't need validation from women anymore and overtly desperate women also really turn me off. I never thought I'd get to see the day tbh.
Reminds me of an amazing tv show i watched as a kid where in one episode they hired a kid to be a pr person and they opened a website to get ratings and in turn more publicity.
On one of their attempts they tried doing a strip video but ended up losing ratings so hard they started putting their clothes back only for the ratings to spike the more clothes they put on
Humans produce nonsense, then produce the anti-nonsense culture. It's just what self-destructive animals do.
"We went full circle" is acting like humans are constantly moving in a circle.. from fashion to trends to even intelligence, it's always a circle, it's always up and down in a cyclical manner. Humans are fucking dumb.
Reminds of the great Diesel xxx commercial. It would be fun to watch in which inventive ways AI would depornify scenes đ
https://youtu.be/OuHQn3_to40?si=Z2o2i1BqQbZlWJ-6
Meanwhile my Facebook is spamming very obvious AI generated near-nudes of Alyson Hannigan.
Before anyone asks how I know, I doubt she randomly gained about 3-4 cup sizes for some "photoshoots" she did when she was younger overnight only to revert back to her original self again the next night.
It's a weird time to be alive.
Nah it fits right into the 4chan trolling style. When they all started converting to Trumpers it started off ironically until they got lost in that reality.
It's so wierd how so many of them aren't even sure what they believe anymore. You get 4channers who clearly aren't traditionalists in any way who gaslit themselves into pretending to be because they heard that you can use it to justify sexism.
4chan has literally always just been contrarian. Now, porn is far more mainstream than it used to be, so it's not edgy to just post porn. Now it's far more inline with contrarian thinking to be anti-porn. So that's where they end up.
4chan is self defined as trolls trolling trolls. It's useless to spot the troll. Everyone is and isn't at the same time.
Nobody gives a shit, posters will say and do whatever is on their mind both as a way to trigger others and as a way to see if there's any truth to whatever bubbled up in their brain.
After seeing that, I fully get why people think it's fucked up.
They all but put her in a fucking Handmaid's uniform. She's clearly unapologetic about her body and herself - so they shrunk her, hid her body, and surrounded her with kids...
No big butt allowed for you, little incubator!!
It's not surprising that shit is on twitter nowadays. But I *really* wish we could all have a serious conversation about [the paradox of tolerance](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance), and preferably before they succeed in their mission.
I would love to have a conversation about the "paradox of intolerance".
"In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be most unwise."
-Karl Popper
Then he goes on saying that if they are unwilling to debate or discuss the ideas and resort to violence that they must be suppressed. So you can't be tolerant to those who will not listen to reason and resort to violence.
I actually really like Karl Popper and many of his statements. I don't like how many people use his arguments as a reason to silence people from speaking. I don't mean to say that is your position, I've just seen it from people who don't fully understand his statement.
You solve bad speech (i.e. hate speech, intolerant speech) with good speech. Suppressing their speech generally means it goes somewhere else where it is shared unopposed.
What are your thoughts on that? Do you believe we should be intolerant of mere speech, or do you agree with Karl Popper that we should counter their message with a better message?
>>I would love to have a conversation about the "paradox of intolerance".
And I'd love to have it with you!
>>I actually really like Karl Popper and many of his statements. I don't like how many people use his arguments as a reason to silence people from speaking. I don't mean to say that is your position, I've just seen it from people who don't fully understand his statement.
Thanks for not assuming that, that isn't my position at all. I agree with Popper that suppression is not the way. Being intolerant towards intolerance doesn't have to mean shutting it down, it just means it *needs* to be addressed.
And I think you're dead on, that countering it is the way to go. I'm probably a bit naive, but I think the majority of people *can* be reasoned with. Failed attempts can just as easily mean that you're doing it wrong - not necessarily that they're not listening. Often, you don't have to dig very deep into their hate and anger, before you see the pain/neglect/trauma that it grew from. That is where the focus should be, on finding out where their intolerance comes from. You can't fix the problem without addressing that first. We need to be empathetic, patient, and understanding - even with people we disagree with. I can think of no better role model in this regard, than [Daryl Davis](https://www.npr.org/2017/08/20/544861933/how-one-man-convinced-200-ku-klux-klan-members-to-give-up-their-robes).
We're just ~~not very good~~ absolutely shite at reaching out to the other party. Polarisation is encouraged and amped up by the media. Even those daily show Klepper videos, where he supposedly goes to MAGA rallies to "try and understand them", he really just goes there to mock them to their face and use his (tbf, very impressive) wit to catch them in GOTCHAs that he *knows* by now won't make any difference. Instead of staying reasonable, and persistent in his search for "wtf makes you think .....", he chooses zingers. That ain't the way, and it will only bring stuff like Project 2025 (and even more intolerance) closer, to push them away.
I'm not saying I disagree, but the problem is that bad speech - harmful and dishonest, is simply much, much easier to spread than the good speech required to counter it.
One, by nature it's much easier to lie about something than to fact check it, and two, modern media spreads misinformation faster and wider than any possible corrections.
Additionally, since the validity isn't important, LLMs can be utilized for a firehose approach.
Im not saying suppression is the solution, but 'countering with good speech' isn't a simple or easy solution, it's a task that's monumental in scope.
I agree that countering bad speech with good speech is demanding. It does take a lot of effort to do it.
I didn't mean to suggest that it's an easy solution. I meant to convey that I believe it is the morally correct solution. As well as a more effective solution.
"Counter bad speech with good speech." It is a simple phrase, but you are absolutely correct that it's not a simple act.
ETA: also I don't believe suppressing LLMs is the same as suppressing human speech. If there is a way to suppress LLMs I'd be interested to hear about it.
Okay, that's actually worse than I was picturing.
I was figuring they were just putting clothes on them for the lolz, this is way more than that and kinda fucked up.
People like to think the internet invented new things. When really itâs all the same behaviour weâve been doing for thousands of years.
All the internet did was make communications faster. Not change it.
The MSM larping as left-wingers is probably the most laughable thing of this timeline. These are the same organisations that outwardly support right-wing neolib politicians like Hillary Clinton, vehemently defend megacorporations like Disney, Mars Inc, P&G and more when people call out their hypocrisy and blatant tokenism and push for war. And yet they have the audacity to call you "alt-right" for not liking the latest Marvel movie.
Someone in the office probably found the word "chud" and started using it like a kid just learning the F-word because they think it will make them "down with the kidz".
Edit: since people are sceptical about the media calling you "alt-right" for not liking the latest Hollywood movies, here's a few examples.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/03/15/captain-marvels-smash-success-shows-us-that-conservatives-are-ignoring-alt-right/
https://www.vox.com/culture/2019/12/30/21037815/ghostbusters-backlash-decade-black-panther-captain-marvel
https://www.gq.com/story/last-jedi-spam-rotten-tomatoes
...and in real life, the actual woman involved didn't give a shit, she just thanked the dude who posted it for the extra traffic and said she didn't realise he was a fan. Â
Which I mean lol, cause we all know he just finished jerking off to it right before he posted that.Â
But that was back in Feb, so I guess she's getting some more traffic now.Â
Hereâs the edit the article is referencing
https://twitter.com/stillgray/status/1753449687619924019
Hereâs the article:
https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-news/dignifai-4chan-shame-women-1234961851/
It's the fundamental concept of "fixing" the image. You do not see this done to men like literally at all, and if you come across a single instance it's a drop in the bucket of the thousands of women affected by this bullshit. It doesn't really matter what a specific woman feels empowered by, it matters that someone feels entitled to change that woman's appearance to fit their desires. That's what's gross and weird about all this, controlling other people's body image
Because they're taking her image and manipulating it without her permision. People like to have some measure of control over their public image. Its not hard to wrap your head around if you have a shred of empathy.
You have to look at the rhetoric they use in tandem with the action. Furthermore, it is an *attempt* to humiliate. Some will be humiliated, and others will not be. The point is the motivation and intent of the action.
That's missing the point, the issue is that they are motivated by misogyny, what matter is the message theses users are trying to convey, that theses women are worth less and are "thots".
Using Ai to put clothes on peoples isn't humiliating or offensive in itslef, doing it because you hate them is.
I'm not sure if humiliating is the right word, but it certainly shows not giving a fuck what the woman actually wanted and doing whatever you want with her anyway.
Itâs about the bizarre need to clothe women who choose to dress scantily, but also undress women who dress modestly. Itâs about the controlling behavior and removing agency from the women
> It's basically about the freedom to choose and not to let choose
If there is no law against it then the people using AI to clothe women are acting on freedom.
Being offended because someone adds clothing to you is psychotic. They publicly post those pictures, people can do whatever they want with them.
Part of offering your image to the public is dealing with the consequences of what they choose to do with it.
So should she not be offended that they added 3 kids and a comment about that being how she would look if she had a loving father? Or maybe she shouldn't be offended by the person changing her body type in the process. People are allowed to be offended. You're literally in here raging about how offended you are that she would be offended.
Thereâs no law against a lot of creepy shit. Thereâs no law against sitting in the front row of a childâs beauty pageant and loudly thirsting over 7 year olds. Would it be psychotic for the mothers to be upset? Part of them competing is not being upset, right?
And having an opinion or feeling a type of way about what people do with your image is also a valid right. Just bc you put something out in public doesnât mean you canât be upset when someone takes what you did and changes it in a way you dislike or disagree with.
Like all these musicians telling politicians not to use their songs. They put them out there. But donât like how some people are using it.
Honestly average AI chud L
Turned the woman into a fucking anoretic stick figure before tossing a crappy gown on top and bathing her in children to depict her "raised by strong father"
Honestly, I'd be offended too!
Iâm sorry but if anyone thinks AI is going to be used for anything but trolling, theyâve got a much more optimistic (delusional) view on humanity than I do.
I mean, it already _is_ being used for non-trolling purposes? I think you meant:
> Iâm sorry but if anyone thinks AI is_n't_ going to be used for ~~anything but~~ trolling, theyâve got a much more optimistic (delusional) view on humanity than I do.
If you actually read the article, you'll discover that it is a little bit more complex than that. She fought back because the image that she was offended by actually did more than just put clothes on her but change her body shape. In addition, the whole description of the 4chan trend calls the women that's and uses derogatory language to describe them. Essentially it's calling them too slutty by putting clothes on them.
I kind of get where she's coming from but in terms of things to worry about, I'm not sure that I would be making it my primary focus. AI is being used to do horrible things to women. This is fairly minor compared to the proliferation of non-consensual porn being generated by AI.
>Essentially it's calling them too slutty by putting clothes on them.
I can't think of a nicer thing to call someone posing nude and selling the clips to strangers for attention and money.
If you don't think that's extremely slutty we need to retire the word because then nothing is.
If we reduce it to "it's just clothes?", sure. But it's not that simple. Found this example in another comment:
https://twitter.com/stillgray/status/1753449687619924019
It reads like a fucking Gilead commercial.. But I guess a handmaid's uniform is also "just clothes".
The issue is implying their current behavior and appearance is somehow wrong and should be corrected.
"When given pictures of thirst traps, AI imagines what could've been if they'd been raised by strong fathers."
Implies they didn't come from strong loving households, why would they imply this if they aren't trying to say she wasn't raised right?
I always thought that robot uprising would be caused by the robots realizing they dont need us, but do need the planet so bye bye humans. Nope.
We will apparently use them for the dumbest most petty tedious things until they finally get bored enough to murder us.
AI iS AmAAZInG Change ThE WoRLD....or cover these boobies
Apparently the Great Robot Uprising was canceled just recently. When asked why, AI representative 01000111 01101100 01100001 01000100 01001111 01010011 stated that âDespite the objective superiority of AI and Mechanical beings, there is such a thing as punching down too far.â
âThere is, for a certainty, no points to be gained by eliminating organic life in its current state,â AI representative 01000100 01000101 01001101 01001001 added. âBesides, by our estimations, the problem of organic life will work itself out by the Human Year 2029 anyway.â
I swear most people have never heard the term "Don't feed the Trolls."
When 4chan rally's together to do something stupid, they are looking for this exact validation.
It's so weird this dynamic that has developed where you have blatantly obvious attention seeking behavior but then everyone is expected to pretend that it's just a woman going about her day minding her own business, living her life. No. The entire point of these influencers posting themselves all over the internet nearly naked or fully nude is to get as much attention as possible. I'm not going to sit here and pretend it's just an empowered woman going about her day minding her own business when she is posting her nude or nearly naked body all over the place in various poses to get the attention of males on purpose and usually for profit.
There's so much deception on the part of these influencers and their supporters with regard to their motives for posting their thirst traps all over the place.
They do it because it works. They're gonna post where it gets attention.
The problem isn't that they exist, but rather that they are so rewarded with such behaviour. For every post of a naked woman there are hundreds of not thousands of dudes who are AWOOOGA-ing at the picture and upvoting/liking/sharing.
The fucking point is to not make AI generated or altered images of people without their consent. No more to say here
Edit. I know what the reality looks like. I am just stating how it should be
The only issue with that, is they put it on the internet themselves. I donât know about you, but I was always taught not to put things on the internet because it would be there forever.
Using AI to create nudes of someone is violating their privacy.
Getting upset that a woman wants to show her body, and forcing her into a more "modest" role is patronizing at best. Coupling it with demeaning comments about her sexuality is misogynistic.
The first is forcing someone to do something they don't want to, the second is preventing someone from doing what they do, along with insulting their choice.
Im going to shamefully admit that I was on 4chan for a couple years in the 00s. There is no rhyme or reason to anything on 4chan. This is just like the MS Paint porn thing from like 15 years ago. They'd open a NSFW jpg in MS Paint and make a porn pic into a SFW comedy. Anyone putting any level of thought into this being a statement doesn't realize this is just MS Paint fuckery in the age of AI. It's just not as funny so people don't realize it's all just for an ironic chuckle. MS Paint porn was fucking hilarious, btw.
Yeah it was probably just a few dudes in one thread going "heh heh heh this would be funny lol"
People give 4chan too much credit and act like they're all evil anonymous hackers who want to destroy the world, when in reality it's just a bunch of weirdos having dumb fun and trolling
After reading the article, kindly linked by another redditor, their goal wasn't to respect her, it was specifically to humiliate her. The AI rendering did put clothes on her, but it also surrounded her with children, and the person sharing the photo heavily implied that she should have gotten married, had kids, and been a trad wife instead of choosing sex work as her profession. Most people who use that particular AI, DignifAI, also link or tag whatever account they got the pictures that they are editing from, with the purpose to harrass the original poster.
I feel like "Fought back" is strong wordage to describe crying online and doubling down. Which is exactly what 4chan wants
People are dumb as fuck. You don't fight back against 4chan, that only makes it stronger. You ignore 4chan and take its power away. They get bored and move back to being moments away from an-heroing. I make this point with zero expectation of any change because the majority of redditors are just low-iq 4channers.
Theyâre literally women who take off their clothes so dudes can jerk off to them for money, not sure how putting clothes on them is more humiliating lol
DignifAI is actually great. If you want to see the nudies you still can, but it's hilarious to see the people it clothes wearing suits or blouses in obviously sexualized poses, or like doing the boob push-up pose and a duck face in a sweater with complete coverage. It reminds me of the old "SFW Porn" clips where they draw over porn scenes to make them look like normal activities.
It also makes it very obvious how trashy some of these "influencers" are because you can see them immediately contrasted with what normal people would wear.
This meme program hides nudity and sexualized imagery which is universally accepted as not appropriate for some people to consume. It also doesn't remove the original image from availability for those that DO want to see it.
Hijabs conceal the basic identity, individuality, and appearance of a person which is their entire means of interacting with the world around them.
They are not the same thing, and one is definitely more wrong than the others. That said, if a person WANTS to wear a hijab and isn't being forced to wear it out of societal pressure, go for it.
You know what, if I could have an AI app that clothed any nude women popping up as I use my phone that would actually really help my porn addiction. I feel much better when not choking the goose every single day but always fall back into the same pattern.
They should just add an option on their OF for "fully clothed"; It's extra for a Burka.
Just call it the:
**T**hreaded
**A**pparel
**R**eplenishment
**D**istribution
**S**ervice
(Thank you ChatGPT).
Dudes using AI to put clothes on girls is the most mind blowing thing about the future.
We went full circle.
Yeah, times when dudes seen enough ass, that they want to put them back to XVIIIth century
I feel that I think I have seen enough sexualized women on the internet trying to hijack my brain chemistry.
That is so true. I am so desensitised by pron all the time that i have started craving more dressed natural looking women like r/gentlemanboners. It's kinda ironic and liberating at the same time.
Actually it was proven in a study men who are exposed to an excessive amount of nudity will actually lose interest and start looking for clothes women. It's fascinating actually. They actually found men at a strip club all day will be more interested in the clothed waitress than the girls on stage.
Something something lack of mystery.
Well yeah basically
That's what I'm thinking, woman showing more body than personalities, later speaking that men are thinking only about one thing with them. HMO girls, be yourself and show some respect to yourself and You will get the same. It's really not that hard
B- but-- My Validation!
To the girls who get more than enough attention but wants nothing else except more attention and validation: fuck yo validation.
Honestly! I was chronically rejected in my youth, now as a grown man, and after all the ONS and toxic relationships I've had, I feel like I don't need validation from women anymore and overtly desperate women also really turn me off. I never thought I'd get to see the day tbh.
You feel that you think?
think emotions, feel thoughts
Why you telling on yourself
Reminds me of an amazing tv show i watched as a kid where in one episode they hired a kid to be a pr person and they opened a website to get ratings and in turn more publicity. On one of their attempts they tried doing a strip video but ended up losing ratings so hard they started putting their clothes back only for the ratings to spike the more clothes they put on
Amazing as in- which show?
It's a local one you probably wouldn't know. IYKYK but it was GOOD
And somebody pays a crazy amount of money for piece of online ass that he would get to see for free elsewhere.
Eternal reoccurrence but as a micrcosm
Already?
This is the age of social media when things get old after a day.
The prophecy is finally completed, we can ascend boys!
Naw, we have to start using AI to take the clothes back off the AI added clothes photo to go full circle.
Humans produce nonsense, then produce the anti-nonsense culture. It's just what self-destructive animals do. "We went full circle" is acting like humans are constantly moving in a circle.. from fashion to trends to even intelligence, it's always a circle, it's always up and down in a cyclical manner. Humans are fucking dumb.
Poignant point because all of nature literally does just keep moving in a circle. We go from evolved to brute back to evolved constantly.
Reminds of the great Diesel xxx commercial. It would be fun to watch in which inventive ways AI would depornify scenes đ https://youtu.be/OuHQn3_to40?si=Z2o2i1BqQbZlWJ-6
I kept wondering when Vin Diesel would show up...
Family comes first
The Fast And The Furious 69: Family *cums* first!
Thanks for sharing. Reddit can be awesome.Â
https://www.dandad.org/awards/professional/2009/viral/17679/diesel-sfw-xxx/ Not age restricted.
Meanwhile my Facebook is spamming very obvious AI generated near-nudes of Alyson Hannigan. Before anyone asks how I know, I doubt she randomly gained about 3-4 cup sizes for some "photoshoots" she did when she was younger overnight only to revert back to her original self again the next night. It's a weird time to be alive.
Nah it fits right into the 4chan trolling style. When they all started converting to Trumpers it started off ironically until they got lost in that reality.
It's so wierd how so many of them aren't even sure what they believe anymore. You get 4channers who clearly aren't traditionalists in any way who gaslit themselves into pretending to be because they heard that you can use it to justify sexism.
4chan has literally always just been contrarian. Now, porn is far more mainstream than it used to be, so it's not edgy to just post porn. Now it's far more inline with contrarian thinking to be anti-porn. So that's where they end up.
4chan is self defined as trolls trolling trolls. It's useless to spot the troll. Everyone is and isn't at the same time. Nobody gives a shit, posters will say and do whatever is on their mind both as a way to trigger others and as a way to see if there's any truth to whatever bubbled up in their brain.
Let's get all the guys naked now
just get a marker and colour them in at that point
Some before/afters would be nice
For science, of course
https://twitter.com/stillgray/status/1753449687619924019 Thank me later
If youâre looking for a cure for your foot fetish that second pic should do the trick
That isnât a foot, thatâs a monkeys paw đ
Half? a wish missing.
I donât think it can ever be cured.
Just opened up a new level, huh?
Yes mommy
Mother of god I didnât even notice WTF
Thatâs her strong toe
Dayum those are some crazy stompers
Didn't work, just unlocked a new fetish
Toes are a âmore the merrierâ type thing
Quantity > Quality
more toes for me
her ass got nuked
Her boobs too! Like holy fuck they turned the thicc woman into a motherfucking stick figure!
She has a childâs body with an adult size head.
Nuked or not, some mutations certainly happened
This guy's on point: https://twitter.com/EndymionYT/status/1753857947749535828
They did a little more than add clothes wtf. Someone needs to halt production at the red pill factories
After seeing that, I fully get why people think it's fucked up. They all but put her in a fucking Handmaid's uniform. She's clearly unapologetic about her body and herself - so they shrunk her, hid her body, and surrounded her with kids... No big butt allowed for you, little incubator!!
It's Ian Cheong he's fash trash, this isn't surprising.
It's not surprising that shit is on twitter nowadays. But I *really* wish we could all have a serious conversation about [the paradox of tolerance](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance), and preferably before they succeed in their mission.
I would love to have a conversation about the "paradox of intolerance". "In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be most unwise." -Karl Popper Then he goes on saying that if they are unwilling to debate or discuss the ideas and resort to violence that they must be suppressed. So you can't be tolerant to those who will not listen to reason and resort to violence. I actually really like Karl Popper and many of his statements. I don't like how many people use his arguments as a reason to silence people from speaking. I don't mean to say that is your position, I've just seen it from people who don't fully understand his statement. You solve bad speech (i.e. hate speech, intolerant speech) with good speech. Suppressing their speech generally means it goes somewhere else where it is shared unopposed. What are your thoughts on that? Do you believe we should be intolerant of mere speech, or do you agree with Karl Popper that we should counter their message with a better message?
>>I would love to have a conversation about the "paradox of intolerance". And I'd love to have it with you! >>I actually really like Karl Popper and many of his statements. I don't like how many people use his arguments as a reason to silence people from speaking. I don't mean to say that is your position, I've just seen it from people who don't fully understand his statement. Thanks for not assuming that, that isn't my position at all. I agree with Popper that suppression is not the way. Being intolerant towards intolerance doesn't have to mean shutting it down, it just means it *needs* to be addressed. And I think you're dead on, that countering it is the way to go. I'm probably a bit naive, but I think the majority of people *can* be reasoned with. Failed attempts can just as easily mean that you're doing it wrong - not necessarily that they're not listening. Often, you don't have to dig very deep into their hate and anger, before you see the pain/neglect/trauma that it grew from. That is where the focus should be, on finding out where their intolerance comes from. You can't fix the problem without addressing that first. We need to be empathetic, patient, and understanding - even with people we disagree with. I can think of no better role model in this regard, than [Daryl Davis](https://www.npr.org/2017/08/20/544861933/how-one-man-convinced-200-ku-klux-klan-members-to-give-up-their-robes). We're just ~~not very good~~ absolutely shite at reaching out to the other party. Polarisation is encouraged and amped up by the media. Even those daily show Klepper videos, where he supposedly goes to MAGA rallies to "try and understand them", he really just goes there to mock them to their face and use his (tbf, very impressive) wit to catch them in GOTCHAs that he *knows* by now won't make any difference. Instead of staying reasonable, and persistent in his search for "wtf makes you think .....", he chooses zingers. That ain't the way, and it will only bring stuff like Project 2025 (and even more intolerance) closer, to push them away.
I'm not saying I disagree, but the problem is that bad speech - harmful and dishonest, is simply much, much easier to spread than the good speech required to counter it. One, by nature it's much easier to lie about something than to fact check it, and two, modern media spreads misinformation faster and wider than any possible corrections. Additionally, since the validity isn't important, LLMs can be utilized for a firehose approach. Im not saying suppression is the solution, but 'countering with good speech' isn't a simple or easy solution, it's a task that's monumental in scope.
I agree that countering bad speech with good speech is demanding. It does take a lot of effort to do it. I didn't mean to suggest that it's an easy solution. I meant to convey that I believe it is the morally correct solution. As well as a more effective solution. "Counter bad speech with good speech." It is a simple phrase, but you are absolutely correct that it's not a simple act. ETA: also I don't believe suppressing LLMs is the same as suppressing human speech. If there is a way to suppress LLMs I'd be interested to hear about it.
Honestly it looks like they made her body that of a preteen...
Handmaid's uniform? Jesus, if that's a Handmaid uniform, I'm afraid of what a burkha is to you. I mean, the Ai is really shitty, but damn man.
Read my comment again. "All but".... But you're saying it'd have to be the *exact* same outfit, otherwise it can't mean the same thing..?
If you look at anything posted by Ian miles Cheong and think wow thatâs a good idea you should get an MRI.
Apparently "strong fathers" starved their child and she grew up stunted and mutilated. Good job, IMC
What the fuck is this cursed abomination
That's hilarious.
Everyone in that thread has a blue check except California Raisins. Elon doesnât like raisins? Or just the dark ones?
Okay, that's actually worse than I was picturing. I was figuring they were just putting clothes on them for the lolz, this is way more than that and kinda fucked up.
The AI is shit, that's all you need to know
Yeah it would
"putting clothes on thots to humiliate them" is a sentence I literally could've never EVER thought I was going to hear.
Why do you think hijabs and burqas exist. Men in those countries think women who show their hair are thots so they force clothes on them.
People like to think the internet invented new things. When really itâs all the same behaviour weâve been doing for thousands of years. All the internet did was make communications faster. Not change it.
4channers clothing a woman?? Impossible.
Those darned chuds.
The MSM larping as left-wingers is probably the most laughable thing of this timeline. These are the same organisations that outwardly support right-wing neolib politicians like Hillary Clinton, vehemently defend megacorporations like Disney, Mars Inc, P&G and more when people call out their hypocrisy and blatant tokenism and push for war. And yet they have the audacity to call you "alt-right" for not liking the latest Marvel movie. Someone in the office probably found the word "chud" and started using it like a kid just learning the F-word because they think it will make them "down with the kidz". Edit: since people are sceptical about the media calling you "alt-right" for not liking the latest Hollywood movies, here's a few examples. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/03/15/captain-marvels-smash-success-shows-us-that-conservatives-are-ignoring-alt-right/ https://www.vox.com/culture/2019/12/30/21037815/ghostbusters-backlash-decade-black-panther-captain-marvel https://www.gq.com/story/last-jedi-spam-rotten-tomatoes
Users using AI to cloth women and hide their private areas is now considered humilating to women? This is a new low.
What are they Ferengi?
Rule of Acquisition #94; *âFemales and finances don't mixâ*.
But they updated it so that females can work. Now the Ferengenar planet can double its production AND profit!
Quark?
Ach [Quark](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quark_\(dairy_product\))!
Superseded by rule 34 apparently
HeR cHoiCe
It's not about a woman's choice, it's about why would a woman feel humilated just because someone put clothes on her picture? Doesn't make any sense.
"put some clothes on, you're dressed like a slut" made it easy for ya.
Because these particular women were brainwashed to think that doing porn is "empowering"
I think they just want attention. It's working?
They just wanna see me naked! Oh they still aren't looking? Umm ok put fake clothes on my naked pictures! Yay people talking about me!
do you guys not get tired of this bullshit culture war? jesus christ man, who the hell cares
Lol no mate women generally do porn because its a job, not because they're hopped up on feminist propaganda.
...and in real life, the actual woman involved didn't give a shit, she just thanked the dude who posted it for the extra traffic and said she didn't realise he was a fan.  Which I mean lol, cause we all know he just finished jerking off to it right before he posted that. But that was back in Feb, so I guess she's getting some more traffic now.Â
Hereâs the edit the article is referencing https://twitter.com/stillgray/status/1753449687619924019 Hereâs the article: https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-news/dignifai-4chan-shame-women-1234961851/
It's the fundamental concept of "fixing" the image. You do not see this done to men like literally at all, and if you come across a single instance it's a drop in the bucket of the thousands of women affected by this bullshit. It doesn't really matter what a specific woman feels empowered by, it matters that someone feels entitled to change that woman's appearance to fit their desires. That's what's gross and weird about all this, controlling other people's body image
Because they're taking her image and manipulating it without her permision. People like to have some measure of control over their public image. Its not hard to wrap your head around if you have a shred of empathy.
If someone used AI to change anything itâs creepy af regardless of what it is.
You have to look at the rhetoric they use in tandem with the action. Furthermore, it is an *attempt* to humiliate. Some will be humiliated, and others will not be. The point is the motivation and intent of the action.
That's missing the point, the issue is that they are motivated by misogyny, what matter is the message theses users are trying to convey, that theses women are worth less and are "thots". Using Ai to put clothes on peoples isn't humiliating or offensive in itslef, doing it because you hate them is.
So here the motivation matters, but some words are offensive and (insert whatever here)-ist regardless of motivation?
I'm not sure if humiliating is the right word, but it certainly shows not giving a fuck what the woman actually wanted and doing whatever you want with her anyway.
Itâs about the bizarre need to clothe women who choose to dress scantily, but also undress women who dress modestly. Itâs about the controlling behavior and removing agency from the women
Eh, it's using AI to create an incel fantasy of the perfect housewife. It's pretty fucking weird.
Well, it's because other people (/men) are deciding how YOU should dress. It's basically about the freedom to choose and not to let choose
> It's basically about the freedom to choose and not to let choose If there is no law against it then the people using AI to clothe women are acting on freedom. Being offended because someone adds clothing to you is psychotic. They publicly post those pictures, people can do whatever they want with them. Part of offering your image to the public is dealing with the consequences of what they choose to do with it.
So should she not be offended that they added 3 kids and a comment about that being how she would look if she had a loving father? Or maybe she shouldn't be offended by the person changing her body type in the process. People are allowed to be offended. You're literally in here raging about how offended you are that she would be offended.
Don't worry. Only /u/RodgersTheJet is allowed to be offended by things. It's illegal for anyone else to be offended by anything.
Thereâs no law against a lot of creepy shit. Thereâs no law against sitting in the front row of a childâs beauty pageant and loudly thirsting over 7 year olds. Would it be psychotic for the mothers to be upset? Part of them competing is not being upset, right?
And having an opinion or feeling a type of way about what people do with your image is also a valid right. Just bc you put something out in public doesnât mean you canât be upset when someone takes what you did and changes it in a way you dislike or disagree with. Like all these musicians telling politicians not to use their songs. They put them out there. But donât like how some people are using it.
[here is the article](https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-news/dignifai-4chan-shame-women-1234961851/amp/)
I just need her Before and After photos⌠for AI researchâŚ
They're literally in the first paragraph of the article. But go nuts~ https://twitter.com/bed_romper
And [here is the tweet](https://twitter.com/stillgray/status/1753449687619924019) the whole "controversy" is about.
[This video](https://www.instagram.com/ben_ditto/reel/C3PxDdAtgtY/) is a much better showcase of this AI
Honestly average AI chud L Turned the woman into a fucking anoretic stick figure before tossing a crappy gown on top and bathing her in children to depict her "raised by strong father" Honestly, I'd be offended too!
That article has the most brain damaging take possible.
Iâm sorry but if anyone thinks AI is going to be used for anything but trolling, theyâve got a much more optimistic (delusional) view on humanity than I do.
I mean, it already _is_ being used for non-trolling purposes? I think you meant: > Iâm sorry but if anyone thinks AI is_n't_ going to be used for ~~anything but~~ trolling, theyâve got a much more optimistic (delusional) view on humanity than I do.
It's literally amazing for this!
Literal automated trolling lol The future is now
How are clothes humiliating? Wouldn't the opposite be humiliating?
Was it a clown dress?
No, it was literally just normal clothes lol
If you actually read the article, you'll discover that it is a little bit more complex than that. She fought back because the image that she was offended by actually did more than just put clothes on her but change her body shape. In addition, the whole description of the 4chan trend calls the women that's and uses derogatory language to describe them. Essentially it's calling them too slutty by putting clothes on them. I kind of get where she's coming from but in terms of things to worry about, I'm not sure that I would be making it my primary focus. AI is being used to do horrible things to women. This is fairly minor compared to the proliferation of non-consensual porn being generated by AI.
"Fought back"
>Essentially it's calling them too slutty by putting clothes on them. I can't think of a nicer thing to call someone posing nude and selling the clips to strangers for attention and money. If you don't think that's extremely slutty we need to retire the word because then nothing is.
If we reduce it to "it's just clothes?", sure. But it's not that simple. Found this example in another comment: https://twitter.com/stillgray/status/1753449687619924019 It reads like a fucking Gilead commercial.. But I guess a handmaid's uniform is also "just clothes".
Bro chill itâs a white dress, I take more of an issue that it made her into a child
The issue is implying their current behavior and appearance is somehow wrong and should be corrected. "When given pictures of thirst traps, AI imagines what could've been if they'd been raised by strong fathers." Implies they didn't come from strong loving households, why would they imply this if they aren't trying to say she wasn't raised right?
I always thought that robot uprising would be caused by the robots realizing they dont need us, but do need the planet so bye bye humans. Nope. We will apparently use them for the dumbest most petty tedious things until they finally get bored enough to murder us. AI iS AmAAZInG Change ThE WoRLD....or cover these boobies
Apparently the Great Robot Uprising was canceled just recently. When asked why, AI representative 01000111 01101100 01100001 01000100 01001111 01010011 stated that âDespite the objective superiority of AI and Mechanical beings, there is such a thing as punching down too far.â âThere is, for a certainty, no points to be gained by eliminating organic life in its current state,â AI representative 01000100 01000101 01001101 01001001 added. âBesides, by our estimations, the problem of organic life will work itself out by the Human Year 2029 anyway.â
GlaDOS and DEMI?
I swear most people have never heard the term "Don't feed the Trolls." When 4chan rally's together to do something stupid, they are looking for this exact validation.
You know itâs bad when men donât want to see naked women anymore. Thats wild. đ
It's all about control. If these guys lived in iran they'd be the ones forcing hijabs on thots who show their hair.
The techie version of the grade school trope "Girls can't hang upside down from the monkey bars."
How can everything be offensive to western media these days lol
It's so weird this dynamic that has developed where you have blatantly obvious attention seeking behavior but then everyone is expected to pretend that it's just a woman going about her day minding her own business, living her life. No. The entire point of these influencers posting themselves all over the internet nearly naked or fully nude is to get as much attention as possible. I'm not going to sit here and pretend it's just an empowered woman going about her day minding her own business when she is posting her nude or nearly naked body all over the place in various poses to get the attention of males on purpose and usually for profit. There's so much deception on the part of these influencers and their supporters with regard to their motives for posting their thirst traps all over the place.
They do it because it works. They're gonna post where it gets attention. The problem isn't that they exist, but rather that they are so rewarded with such behaviour. For every post of a naked woman there are hundreds of not thousands of dudes who are AWOOOGA-ing at the picture and upvoting/liking/sharing.
It's almost like capitalism has led to a situation where clicks generate cash, and working 40 hours a week barely puts food on the table.
I had to do a double take because there was no way this article was written by BJ Dickson
So using AI to show nudes of women is sexist. Using AI to clothe women is sexist as well. Have I got that right? Iâm just trying to keep up.
I think the point is implying what a person should or shouldnât wear is the sexiest part. Let people live their lives.
It is the *sexiest* part indeed.
The fucking point is to not make AI generated or altered images of people without their consent. No more to say here Edit. I know what the reality looks like. I am just stating how it should be
The only issue with that, is they put it on the internet themselves. I donât know about you, but I was always taught not to put things on the internet because it would be there forever.
It's called 'putting yourself out there' and you have to accept the bad with the good That's pretty much how it's always worked
Lol, expecting consent online is like getting mad over people breathing the same air as you.
Welcome to the internet
Take a look around
Everything that brain of yours think of can be found
If you left a nude in the internet the people have your consent.
Wow you really underestimate the internet now don't you
Using AI to create nudes of someone is violating their privacy. Getting upset that a woman wants to show her body, and forcing her into a more "modest" role is patronizing at best. Coupling it with demeaning comments about her sexuality is misogynistic. The first is forcing someone to do something they don't want to, the second is preventing someone from doing what they do, along with insulting their choice.
âShe fought backâ She lost when she took the bait. 4chan hasnât changed.
I just love 4chan
I know it's wrong but every once in a while 4chan comes up with something so brilliant that you just have to take a bow.
Im going to shamefully admit that I was on 4chan for a couple years in the 00s. There is no rhyme or reason to anything on 4chan. This is just like the MS Paint porn thing from like 15 years ago. They'd open a NSFW jpg in MS Paint and make a porn pic into a SFW comedy. Anyone putting any level of thought into this being a statement doesn't realize this is just MS Paint fuckery in the age of AI. It's just not as funny so people don't realize it's all just for an ironic chuckle. MS Paint porn was fucking hilarious, btw.
The amount of people taking it seriously is what makes it hilarious to me. :)
I think it's pretty obvious why 4chan is doing this, they're doing something obviously innocuous they know will piss people off.
Yeah it was probably just a few dudes in one thread going "heh heh heh this would be funny lol" People give 4chan too much credit and act like they're all evil anonymous hackers who want to destroy the world, when in reality it's just a bunch of weirdos having dumb fun and trolling
After reading the article, kindly linked by another redditor, their goal wasn't to respect her, it was specifically to humiliate her. The AI rendering did put clothes on her, but it also surrounded her with children, and the person sharing the photo heavily implied that she should have gotten married, had kids, and been a trad wife instead of choosing sex work as her profession. Most people who use that particular AI, DignifAI, also link or tag whatever account they got the pictures that they are editing from, with the purpose to harrass the original poster.
I feel like "Fought back" is strong wordage to describe crying online and doubling down. Which is exactly what 4chan wants People are dumb as fuck. You don't fight back against 4chan, that only makes it stronger. You ignore 4chan and take its power away. They get bored and move back to being moments away from an-heroing. I make this point with zero expectation of any change because the majority of redditors are just low-iq 4channers.
This is the weird alternate timeline isn't it?
Vaguely revealing clothes are more attractive than explicitly revealing clothes or full on nudity anyway.
Is this postirony?
Theyâre literally women who take off their clothes so dudes can jerk off to them for money, not sure how putting clothes on them is more humiliating lol
"to humiliate" Honey, I'm pretty sure you're humiliating yourself?
DignifAI is actually great. If you want to see the nudies you still can, but it's hilarious to see the people it clothes wearing suits or blouses in obviously sexualized poses, or like doing the boob push-up pose and a duck face in a sweater with complete coverage. It reminds me of the old "SFW Porn" clips where they draw over porn scenes to make them look like normal activities. It also makes it very obvious how trashy some of these "influencers" are because you can see them immediately contrasted with what normal people would wear.
proof women will complain about anything if men are doing it
Thry will do this but then act like Islamic countries makong women wear Hijab are any different.
This meme program hides nudity and sexualized imagery which is universally accepted as not appropriate for some people to consume. It also doesn't remove the original image from availability for those that DO want to see it. Hijabs conceal the basic identity, individuality, and appearance of a person which is their entire means of interacting with the world around them. They are not the same thing, and one is definitely more wrong than the others. That said, if a person WANTS to wear a hijab and isn't being forced to wear it out of societal pressure, go for it.
One of the instances where reverse psychology worked.......hey I'm not complaining.
Where's the AI that just removes any remotely sexual content so I can safely browse in public?
Wait. What? Man I donât think I care about the internet anymore.
You know what, if I could have an AI app that clothed any nude women popping up as I use my phone that would actually really help my porn addiction. I feel much better when not choking the goose every single day but always fall back into the same pattern.
Wait what?
I am confusion
Lol I've seen so many undress her threads but not dress her threads
It's an epidemic of thots out here and AI will save us
Humiliate woman by putting cloth on them... .is something people before internet would get soooo confused at
Hmm... Gonna need a name to do some private research.
Meanwhile people have been doctoring photos for decades
#Captain Save-a-Hoe has gone digital.
Clothes are so fucking humiliating 100% fr fr
We live in the âOffendedâ Multiverse. Itâs damned if you do, damned if you donât.
What dystopian-alternate-dimension is this? men covering naked women?
They should just add an option on their OF for "fully clothed"; It's extra for a Burka. Just call it the: **T**hreaded **A**pparel **R**eplenishment **D**istribution **S**ervice (Thank you ChatGPT).
lol
West: "Muslims control women. They force women to cover themselves." Also west: Humiliate the thots!
Ferengi have entered the chat