460
A Spanish agency became so sick of models and influencers that they created their own with AI — and she’s raking in up to $11,000 a month (fortune.com)
submitted 2 years ago by [M, B] to c/technology@lemmy.world
157 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

A Spanish agency became so sick of models and influencers that they created their own with AI — and she’s raking in up to $11,000 a month::Founder Rubén Cruz said AI model Aitana was so convincing that a famous Latin actor asked her on a date.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 12 points 2 years ago (2 children)

I'm give with cgi models. But you have to tell people it's s fictional model

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 18 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Hasn't everything been fictional since the invention of Photoshop some decades ago? And even before that people have been faking photos by analog means. Photos, especially in the context of advertisement, have never been non-fictional.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 9 points 2 years ago (4 children)

    You mean like:

    Warning! You will never be in a relationship with this model.

    Yes. That seems like something people should know.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 15 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    I get that this is kind of a joke, but we already have a problem with these models/influencers projecting unrealistic beauty ideals and pretending to lead these unrealistic lives, and it's causing major issues already. If companies can basically craft exactly what they want, I can see it being orders or magnitude worse.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    The point of the joke is that it makes no difference if a persona is fake or "real". I think the issues you raise are real. But it makes no difference to unrealistic beauty standards whether artists alter an existing human body or make one up wholesale. If anything, it's more benign if people rationally know that it is all a fantasy.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    But it makes no difference to unrealistic beauty standards whether artists alter an existing human body or make one up wholesale.

    This is what I'm not so sure about, as in the completely crafted one can do anything at any time with almost zero effort. They don't age. They don't have any imperfections. There's no risk (?) of them ever going off the rails. Even tho the influences project an fake front, you can still be them, as they are real. If something isn't even real, you could create things that could never possibly exist.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    They have all the imperfections that the artists want them to have. They age as much or as little as they are made to. That's not so different from human celebrity personas. Sometimes we get a Paparazzi photo, showing how they really look, but is that occasional reality check so different from rationally knowing that it is all fantasy?

    (I say "rationally knowing" because one criticism of unrealistic beauty is that it may be shifting our unconscious knowledge of what is normal. If that is true, then rational knowledge is not helpful.)

    Even tho the influences project an fake front, you can still be them, as they are real.

    I think this goes to the heart of the argument. I don't think that is good.

    Influencers (and other celebrities) typically portray themselves as being happy and well-adjusted, living exciting and fulfilling lives; all while being surrounded by luxury products with generous marketing departments. I don't think that the idea that you could actually be such a person is psychologically beneficial to anyone (except those brands, obvs).

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago* (1 child)

    I don’t think that is good.

    No one here is saying they think this is good. Just the fact that, because a human has done it, it is something actually attainable by a human. If you remove the human, you remove that logical conclusion.

    But to make myself abundantly clear, I think far too often influencers are trash doing a lot of harm to society, especially due to the deception about their contentedness.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    Just the fact that, because a human has done it, it is something actually attainable by a human.

    I think I am misunderstanding something. It is not attainable to be a person like influencers typically pretend to be. It's only possible to be a pretender, just like it's possible to be a CGI artist creating AI imagery.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago

    I think the issue is that they have a problem with it for the wrong reasons and fixing it for the wrong people. So the influencer issue is lying to scam people and editing their images leading and young people to expect unrealistic appearances. And the model issue is they need to be paid to live.

    So here’s an AI to look unrealistic to lie and scam people and produce unrealistic standards whom you can’t date anyways. But hey, it doesn’t need to be paid to live.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago

    Warning! You will never be in a relationship with this model.

    It's AI generated, there is a good chance of them selling relationship-as-a-service in the near future. In a way, your chances with an AI model are way bigger than with a real one.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent