Answering the question in the image: machine learning arose from the industrial control world. The idea was to teach a machine how to detect defects in supposedly identical objects out of a manufacturing line, most often with “machine vision” (ie. a camera). Applying it to humans was asinine.
I know right? I have seen seen vision systems do some impressive things, but they are carefully calibrated to work in a specific way under certain conditions. Some of the ones my company works with get fed CAD in real time so the robot knows what to look for.
Please don’t roast me here, but why is wanting to know what someone looks like without makeup such a bad thing? I’ve never even thought about it before, so please don’t take this as advocating for it. It just doesn’t immediately occur to me what the problem would be.
I get why it’s gross to have an app to remove clothing, but makeup feels like a different category.
What about an app that changes or removes hair? Or one for sunglasses/jewelry?
Are they all gross in some way that I’m missing? Is it creepy to remove makeup from photos but not creepy to remove earrings?
It’s kind of creepy to do anything to a photo without consent. I’m a dude with plugs, and it’d be a little off-putting if a stranger I didn’t know digitally removed my ear rings to see what I’d look like.
This is how I present myself. You can see me without ear rings or makeup when I want you too.
You don’t need an app for that, you just shake the board a little and the metal shavings fall to the bottom. You just have to use the little magnet stick to grow it back where you want!
I don’t know. I’ve seen a few examples of women who have radically changed their looks via skillful application of cosmetics.
I don’t know what to do with that. On one hand, society expects them to use available techniques to change their appearance to meet standards of beauty very few can ever accomplish. Otoh, it’s dishonest because irl they’re not who they seem to be, so an app that shows them without makeup might be useful. But the catch-22 is that the app may not be right, or that we judge too harshly based on an unattainable standard.
Man, Beauty is fucked up in the West. CGI, photoshop, photo manipulation have destroyed reality in favor of manipulating what desirability is.
On the surface it seems reasonable, but it tends to have misogynistic undertones, especially if said towards strangers.
It’s like when the paparazzi publishes photos of celebrities with no makeup without their consent. If her makeup skills are good, she gets accused of “deceiving” people about her real age/looks. If her makeup skills are bad, she just gets called ugly.
I like that you asked. While I don’t hold a strong opinion on it, I think you could argue that it is about consent.
I will argue more strongly than I feel because I think it helps to understand the point. (Assuming the person wearing makeup is a woman)
If you don’t know the woman, why do you care if she wears makeup and how she looks without? It seems like there isn’t a legitimate reason for it without it being a toxic reason, like “look! she isn’t prettier than me!” Vibe. Which is toxic for both people. Now it was a man who made the app. Now there is the hating of women for wearing makeup reasons but let’s ignore those. (Case: Unknown feelings of the woman)
If you know the woman and you don’t know how she looks without makeup, then that is clearly a decision made by the woman. Why do you have the right to expose her in a way that she doesn’t want to be. I mean some women don’t care if you see their tummies and others would rather die. Should you have the right to expose a woman’s tummy? (Case: Implied decision to not show herself like that)
If you know the woman and you want to argue that you have a justified interest in how she looks without makeup because she is a potential Partner (if she is a partner, you probably know already anyway). You could easily argue that you have the same legitimate reason to see her naked but obviously you wouldn’t think that it is a legitimate reason.
In other words, you shouldn’t care and it is kinda toxic to care; you don’t have consent to see them like it otherwise you would; you have no right to know.
I’ve edited people’s makeup and faces as part of the process of learning Photoshop, so I understand what you’re saying. There are perfectly normal applications for this.
The issue is intent. A lot of men think that women are “lying” when they wear makeup. They think that the most valuable quality a woman can have is natural beauty, and treat makeup as trickery.
There’s no shortage of men who think “You’d look better without makeup” is a compliment too.
An app like this would inevitably be used to help streamline the process of harassIng and negging women online.
There’s also the matter that women can put great time and effort into their makeup, and having someone remove their hard work from an image and throw it back at them is quite insulting. A makeup artist is still an artist and they likely don’t want their peers wielding tools designed specifically to nullify their work.
It shouldn’t be illegal or anything. No law against being an asshole. But it isn’t an app that will be used with good intent in most cases, and we should definitely pay attention because the “modify pictures of other people’s faces and bodies” use case for AI appears to have the potential to do a great deal of harm.
The brainrot is real. what do you think you proved linking to a press release about an ad campaign? where are the masterpieces of makeup? Zendaya and other zoomer influencers are unfortunately not art you tard
Look, you’re the one who set the Louvre as the standard for what is or isn’t art. If you want to keep moving the goalpost, by all means, explain what you actually think makes something art.
Widely despised (w/o consent). Maybe it’s too linked to the release at some point of the images. but I have a feeling even if no one ever posted that stuff, we would still feel icky about it.
Interesting, something is icky but I don’t know why
Dude. If I could guarantee that my sacrifice would also remove some N>1 number of dumbshits who shouldn’t be contributing to the ecological load the Earth’s ecosystem is bearing, I’d volunteer.
Throwing babies in the deep end is how you remove a lot of dead babies who would have grown up to be excellent swimmers.
Like, you fail to understand that youre first on the chopping block if we start to push darwinism. You wouldn’t be sacrificing yourself, you’d just be the first to go.
Maybe? Natural selection seems to work for the rest of everything in nature. But humans are special, aren’t we? Above nature; different rules apply to us, nature itself treats us differently.
I do agree that humans are fundamentally different in that more of our individual value is learned than inherited. OTOH, more of our value is learned than inherited, and that’s where the problem lies. It’s not there genes, it’s the parents and the parenting. I’m not suggesting we’ll improve humanity by removing stupidity through evolution; I’m saying there are a lot of people who I don’t believe are fit to raise children. And there’s a corpus of examples that could support that argument; how about that guy who literally shook his infant to death last week? Good father, him?
I’m not a parent myself, and I will never be one. Maybe I’d make a good father, maybe not. But I’m not breeding, so taking me out doesn’t affect the gene pool; I’m not playing in the gene pool.
And, no, I did not misunderstand the point. What I said was that if I could get a guarantee that others would also be removed, I’d volunteer to be in the group.
That was hyperbole, BTW; if I really believed it, I’d go to a Trump rally with a bunch of C4 and ball bearings wrapped around my torso. Even if I were an Einstein, it’d be a net benefit to humanity.
lemmyshitpost
Oldest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.