This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Holy crap you weren't kidding. This one is the craziest I've seen so far... https://x.com/CSP_Trading/status/1823767957731750097
Politicians aside, that at least seems to show that the AI is good with actually matching the adjective or adjectival phrase with the corresponding noun. I've found that AIs tend to get this sort of thing wrong a lot of the time; there'd be a good chance that the couch, bra, and panties would be given to random people in the image.
More options
Context Copy link
Seeing this and the replies about lookalike porn actresses made me have a random thought. As alluded to in the replies, lookalike actresses that actually really look like the original in a way that doesn't break suspension of disbelief are not easy to come by, which means porn parodies of live action works are always likely to be highly imperfect. If the idea of Han Solo playing with Luke Skywalker's lightsaber turns you on, the closest thing you're gonna get is probably gonna look like 2 young men cosplaying, and the image of actually young Harrison Ford and young Mark Hamill is stuck in your imperfect imagination.
And this is an area where I thought anime had a huge advantage over live-action. If you like the idea of watching some cartoon characters bang, you can usually pretty quickly find hentai artwork of that, often in a style very very similar to the original cartoon, and sometimes even by the exact same artist who drew the original cartoon using the exact same style. You're not getting a porn parody, you're essentially getting a porn version of the original work, in a way that you don't and simply can't get for a live action work.
Well, until now with generative AI. Of course, photorealistic CGI - or at least, close-enough-to-photorealistic CGI - has been a thing before this generative AI technology, but the skills and resources required to pull off a truly believable porn version of a live action work was just out of reach for hobbyists. AI is not there yet, certainly for video but also for still images, but, as they say, it's only going to get better. And given how in the anime world, a flood of hentai fanart of basically any semi-popular character is guaranteed, I wonder if we'll see this kind of thing happen with live-action works, which, of course, involve real actors with real faces and real bodies that they walk around in the real world with.
But then, we could enter an Ouroboros kind of situation where, as video gen AI gets easier and cheaper, all popular live action works are actually "live action, as presented by Disney," aka not live action but entirely computer-generated, with photorealistic CGI characters who don't actually look like real people, at least not intentionally. Imagine if photorealistic movies and TV shows that achieve that photorealism by actually taking video of real people acting in real places instead of using genAI go the way of plays, which still exist and are even quite prominent, but are eclipsed in audience size and stature by similarly styled video art.
Realistic deepfake pornographic imagery is definitely feasible with current technology. A moderately bright person with a decent GPU could probably start churning them out after a week of self-study and experimentation.
I think the reason you rarely see or hear about this is that no company wants to be associated with this content. It's banned on all mainstream platforms like Reddit, Discord, and Twitter. Maybe they fear legal liability, but I think the sheer "ick" factor is already sufficient to dissuade them from hosting it, for fear of reputational damage. So the discussion and dissemination of this stuff happens in private/obscure/sketchy forums.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Funny that it just puts (loose versions of) their faces onto generic hot woman bodies without even being prompted to. Harris is 59, lol.
I actually didn't recognize who they were supposed to be. It's not really "them" in any way the porn parodies of 2004 weren't "them" only without the actress informing us who she is.
Hairstyle, mannerism and catchphrases were enough to convince me that Vivids seminal (hehe) work Who's Bangin' Palin captured the physical essence of Sarah Palin perfectly in Lisa Anns headlining portrayal of a senior american politicians engaging in aggressive diplomacy with russian emissaries.
No, I'm serious. Just the hair and glasses and a 'you betcha!' were enough to spike the immersion. The other actresses just couldn't cut it, but Lisa Ann did.
For mere physical similarities to other visible public figures its alot more difficult. Perhaps only Anissa Kate can pull off pretending to be Gal Gadot, but thats because both of them are terrible actresses with worse accents.
(I imagine some more degenerate posters here would go 'ah I see you are a man of culture too').
I find Shadman's depiction of Hillary Clinton to be one of the classics of all time.
Ah, I see you're a man of culture as well.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link