The idea is not new. It’s effectively “Photoshop live,” i.e. pasting a “live” head on another women’s “live” naked body.
I agree with another poster it will lose its power as soon as everyone knows this can be done.
What prior knowledge allowed you to judge the realism?
He didn’t tell me it was a deepfake, he sent me the video with a note about a “weird Tom Cruise” video. I then showed it to my wife and son without pre-explanation, and they were fooled. Have you seen it?
Yes, it is a similar problem to DRM. Something needs to be kept secret from the owner/user of a device. Things like TPM chips can help with this, but that leads into a right to repair nightmare, and lots of other problems. Signing images is something that is already done by some commercial cameras, and there’s been lots of work by real cryptographers in this area. I have no idea what the state of the art is.
You’re talking about the same hole used now of recording a bluray off a 4k screen by pointing a camera at it. To fake a video you might also have to spoof GPS, and possibly some NTP servers. Those are both completely possible.
In court, there will be lawyers on both sides making arguments, and the jury may have to decide whether to believe the video or not. In the court of public opinion your also going to have people making similar arguments, but the results of that will often be based on how much people want to believe the image as opposed to how valid it appears to be.
Haven’t seen it, was joking about you judging it “realistic”, which implies you know what a nude Cruise would look like.
Wasn’t funny enough to justify explanation, but it’s been that sorta week here.
Aaaah, it wasn’t nude, completely missed that. But the part where I showed it to my wife and son becomes much funnier. 
This is it, and I promise there is no nudity. 
Yes, it is by no means, as the OP’s title suggests, only women.
It is kinda odd, I have seen deepfakes of movie stars that had nude scenes in film, and the deepfakes were clearly not the actual star.
Not to mention the human memory is both poor and malleable. You memories can be changed , in some cases, quite easily by someone wishing to give you new memories. Which I why, although I do believe they are not lying, memories of incidents decades ago now dredged up are totally worthless.
The specific website the article refers to only works on photos of women.
But it doesn’t work on men. When fed a photo of a cisgender man’s clothed body, the site gave him breasts and a vulva.
I tried a different image, in which the subject is directly facing the camera, and the result was pretty realistic. Except it put a flat chest on a girl who is most definitely not flat.
If you want it to work on photos of men, you need to train it on photos of men. Probably one or another of those websites has, or will soon have, the option. Another logical side-project would let you describe a scene in words and get a custom pornographic image.
Hey, at least he gets a new car out of the deal
And worse - imagine when the less scrupulous media start using this. We’re already at a point where people live in different realities depending on which information sources they use. Once realistically fake videos become commonplace, the ability to determine what’s real and what’s fake will get much, much harder. Not only will society become even more tribal, but you’ll see even more people suffering breakdowns due to the inability to know what reality is.
Jesus, I sound like asahi.
It will be like Running Man
This sounds like a modern version of those “X-Ray Specs” you could order as a kid. They were among the gadgets advertised in comic books and such. A pair of glasses that supposedly let you see everyone naked. Anyone ever send off for a pair?
I don’t think that’s the case. This article was published just two days ago in The Korea Times. Looks to me like the knowledge of fakery does not put the issue to rest.
I guess I do. The idea of seeing someone I know naked both attracts me and repels me in ways that seeing a perfect stranger naked do not.
It’s gonna be an interesting future for sure. Human judgement of images, video and sound recordings is going to be virtually useless very soon.
Just as with other data, we’ll soon need to rely on digital signing and/or trust networks over our eyes and ears on this stuff…
What terrifies me is that if that machine learning becomes too good at creating believable fake images / videos / audio, those may no longer be deemed admissible evidence in court.
People could end up getting away with all sorts of crimes simply because there are no eyewitnesses aside from the victim.
Yeah … not really quite the same thing. Those X-Ray Glasses – I never sent out for those, but we picked 'em up at the novelty store. All they do is kinda blur some shit around and make it look gray and kinda sorta like you’re looking at an X-ray. No actual tits or titillation, just some stupid half-assed optical trick. Deep nudes? A little more explicit to say the least.