this post was submitted on 08 Dec 2023
395 points (93.2% liked)
Technology
59080 readers
3563 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
It tells me we're less interested in the data (the skin map and topography) than we are in seeing the data in raw form, whether it is accurate or not. It tells me a primary pretense of body doubles was ineffective since society responds the same way regardless of whether an actress' nudity is real or simulated.
Not sure how this will be enforceable any more than we can stop malicious actors from printing guns. Personally, I would prefer a clothes-optional society were individuals aren't measured by the media exposure of their bodies or history of lovers. Maybe in another age or two.
In fiction, I imagined the capacity to render porn action into mo-cap data, to capture fine-resoluton triangle maps and skin texture maps from media, ultimately to render any coupling one could desire with a robust physics engine and photography effects to render it realistic (or artistic, however one prefers). It saddens me that one could render an actress into an Elsa Jean scenario and by doing so, wreck their career.
Porn doesn't bother me, but the arbitrariness with which we condemn individuals by artificial scandal disgusts me more than the raunchiest debauchery.
Data. Return to your quarters