Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Thursday July 11 2019, @01:53AM   Printer-friendly
from the information-wants-to-be-[clothing]-free dept.

Github is banning copies of 'deepfakes' porn app DeepNude

GitHub is banning code from DeepNude, the app that used AI to create fake nude pictures of women. Motherboard, which first reported on DeepNude last month, confirmed that the Microsoft-owned software development platform won't allow DeepNude projects. GitHub told Motherboard that the code violated its rules against "sexually obscene content," and it's removed multiple repositories, including one that was officially run by DeepNude's creator.

DeepNude was originally a paid app that created nonconsensual nude pictures of women using technology similar to AI "deepfakes." The development team shut it down after Motherboard's report, saying that "the probability that people will misuse it is too high." However, as we noted last week, copies of the app were still accessible online — including on GitHub.

Late that week, the DeepNude team followed suit by uploading the core algorithm (but not the actual app interface) to the platform. "The reverse engineering of the app was already on GitHub. It no longer makes sense to hide the source code," wrote the team on a now-deleted page. "DeepNude uses an interesting method to solve a typical AI problem, so it could be useful for researchers and developers working in other fields such as fashion, cinema, and visual effects."

Also at The Register, Vice, and Fossbytes.

Previously: "Deep Nude" App Removed By Developers After Brouhaha

Related: AI-Generated Fake Celebrity Porn Craze "Blowing Up" on Reddit
Discord Takes Down "Deepfakes" Channel, Citing Policy Against "Revenge Porn"
My Struggle With Deepfakes
Deep Fakes Advance to Only Needing a Single Two Dimensional Photograph


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Thursday July 11 2019, @04:58AM (16 children)

    by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Thursday July 11 2019, @04:58AM (#865685) Journal

    So when Github gets their panties in a bunch over what someone might do with DeepNude forks it seems contrary to my entire opensource experience.

    How come?
    I mean:
    1. "don't worry about it. People do what people do."
    2. GitHub/MS is people

    should follow into "Don't worry about it. GitHub/MS does what GitHub/MS does".
    Go find another place for your code if you believe in what you developed and that's that.

    --
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by Knowledge Troll on Thursday July 11 2019, @05:36AM (15 children)

    by Knowledge Troll (5948) on Thursday July 11 2019, @05:36AM (#865695) Homepage Journal

    How come?

    The push for censorship is a new phenomenon in open source. That's why it seems contrary.

     

    • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Thursday July 11 2019, @06:10AM (14 children)

      by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Thursday July 11 2019, @06:10AM (#865701) Journal

      The push for censorship

      You will have to demonstrate in an acceptable manner that this is a push for censorship for me to accept that's a valid reason to worry.

      Does the fact that I refused to use any Linux distro with a systemd init means I'm trying to censor systemd or I'm engaging in a "censorship of open source"?
      All I'm saying is: 'No systemd on my computers" - how's this different from GitHub saying "No DeepNude on our computers?"

      --
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
      • (Score: 2) by coolgopher on Thursday July 11 2019, @06:23AM (5 children)

        by coolgopher (1157) on Thursday July 11 2019, @06:23AM (#865705)

        Well, for starters, they've positioned themselves as an open hosting provider. If you'd positioned yourself as an any-init-system-goes place, and then banned systemd, your point would have some validity.

        • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Thursday July 11 2019, @06:35AM (4 children)

          by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Thursday July 11 2019, @06:35AM (#865712) Journal

          Well, for starters, they've positioned themselves as an open hosting provider

          I can't blame you for not reading the Acceptable use [github.com] section** beforehand, neither do I, but doing it would have stopped you short from thinking "GitHub == open hosting provider" or, indeed, that an "open hosting provider" refrain from imposing any limits.

          Short version: GitHub hosts a wide variety of collaborative projects from all over the world, and that collaboration only works when our users are able to work together in good faith. While using the service, you must follow the terms of this section, which include some restrictions on content you can post, conduct on the service, and other limitations.

          ---
          ** or, is it "sexion" in the context?

          --
          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
          • (Score: 2) by coolgopher on Thursday July 11 2019, @07:16AM (3 children)

            by coolgopher (1157) on Thursday July 11 2019, @07:16AM (#865719)

            None of the restrictions in the AUP would appear to apply in this case. Code of academic interest was posted in a repo. That is not obscene. Well, it shouldn't be. Heaven knows there's a backlash against science among many in the upper echelons...

            • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Thursday July 11 2019, @07:37AM (2 children)

              by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Thursday July 11 2019, @07:37AM (#865728) Journal

              None of the restrictions in the AUP would appear to apply in this case. Code of academic interest was posted in a repo. That is not obscene.

              Are you sure? Speaking for myself, I'd like a citation.

              All I could find: the origin of TFA is actually Motherboard/Vice [vice.com] (the others just cite that one).
              They say

              "We do not proactively monitor user-generated content, but we do actively investigate abuse reports. In this case, we disabled the project because we found it to be in violation of our acceptable use policy," a GitHub spokesperson told Motherboard in a statement. "We do not condone using GitHub for posting sexually obscene content and prohibit such conduct in our Terms of Service and Community Guidelines."

              Unfortunately, that and the rest of TFA say nothing on the line of "there were deleted repos that didn't have any other content except code of academic interest ".

              --
              https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
              • (Score: 2) by Knowledge Troll on Thursday July 11 2019, @07:51AM (1 child)

                by Knowledge Troll (5948) on Thursday July 11 2019, @07:51AM (#865730) Homepage Journal

                We do not condone using GitHub for posting sexually obscene content and prohibit such conduct in our Terms of Service and Community Guidelines.

                When I read a sentence like that it leaves the impression that the github repo was being used to store images of pornography not a collection of words and symbols that can produce pornographic content. So lets see what M-W thinks of obscene:

                disgusting to the senses

                I don't think that one quite cuts it though I think 'disgusting to mind' would work.

                abhorrent to morality or virtue; specifically : designed to incite to lust or depravity

                Now we are starting to get pretty damn warm.

                containing or being language regarded as taboo in polite usage

                Ring that bell!

                repulsive by reason of crass disregard of moral or ethical principles

                Another bingo here.

                so excessive as to be offensive

                Really depends on who you are for that one I think. In fact all of that really depends on who you are, your moral code, and the culture you were brought up in. But it's Github's show, they get to decide what is and is not obscene, and there is no appeal. That's that.

                I still think it's contrary to opensource principles.

                • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Thursday July 11 2019, @08:07AM

                  by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Thursday July 11 2019, @08:07AM (#865733) Journal

                  I still think it's contrary to opensource principles.

                  But I don't see GitHub as ever making a promise to uphold opensource principles above anything else.
                  It's a commercial entity, their foremost duty is to their shareholders.

                  Whenever expectations are not met, one will need to critically examine both sides. It may be a failure to deliver to what was agreed is expected, but it well may be a case of overinflated expectations based on unsubstantiated assumptions.

                  --
                  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
      • (Score: 2) by Knowledge Troll on Thursday July 11 2019, @06:39AM (7 children)

        by Knowledge Troll (5948) on Thursday July 11 2019, @06:39AM (#865713) Homepage Journal

        You will have to demonstrate in an acceptable manner that this is a push for censorship for me to accept that's a valid reason to worry.

        I doubt severely that I can find any acceptable way to demonstrate to you that there is a push for censorship.

        Does the fact that I refused to use any Linux distro with a systemd init means I'm trying to censor systemd or I'm engaging in a "censorship of open source"?

        Lets go check the definitions of censorship that I already provided to you because your existing definition was absolutely wrong.

        M-W defines censorship as the institution, system, or practice of censoring which is itself to examine in order to suppress (see suppress sense 2) or delete anything considered objectionable and supress sense 2 being to keep from public knowledge: such as to keep secret; to stop or prohibit the publication or revelation of;

        Wikipedia says Censorship is the suppression of speech, public communication, or other information, on the basis that such material is considered objectionable, harmful, sensitive, or "inconvenient". Censorship can be conducted by a government, private institutions, and corporations.

        So the answer is no. Do us a favor and go shout at people who say systemd is good, go deface systemd websites by removing the content and replacing it with SysV init documentation in tandem with shell documentation, and hack Debian and yank it out of the repos. Then you would be censoring.

        • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Thursday July 11 2019, @06:47AM (6 children)

          by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Thursday July 11 2019, @06:47AM (#865715) Journal

          Do us a favor and go shout at people who say systemd is good, go deface systemd websites by removing the content and replacing it with SysV init documentation in tandem with shell documentation, and hack Debian and yank it out of the repos. Then you would be censoring.

          I have a hard time imagining MS did shout about "DeepNude" or defaced any other websites related to DeepNude, etc...
          It simply denied those projects to use GitHub as a collaboration platform, nothing more.
          Since GitHub is privately owned by MS and comes with conditions attached for using it [github.com], MS was not even abusing its position.

          --
          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
          • (Score: 2) by Knowledge Troll on Thursday July 11 2019, @07:08AM (5 children)

            by Knowledge Troll (5948) on Thursday July 11 2019, @07:08AM (#865718) Homepage Journal

            I have a hard time imagining MS did shout about "DeepNude" or defaced any other websites related to DeepNude, etc...

            No, that's what you have to do if you want to be a censor. You asked if you were censoring if you don't use systemd. I said no then provided an example of what it takes for you to censor systemd: you interrupt the delivery of information related to it. Github doesn't have to go shouting at people because they can delete the project and interrupt the delivery of information related to DeepNude.

            If you take a poster off a wall because you don't agree with it you are censoring. If you don't use systemd because it sucks you just have good taste.

            • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Thursday July 11 2019, @07:20AM (4 children)

              by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Thursday July 11 2019, @07:20AM (#865720) Journal

              If you take a poster off a wall because you don't agree with it you are censoring. If you don't use systemd because it sucks you just have good taste.

              :) (on the "good taste")

              Seriously though, if I take a poster off my wall. I'm just exercising my right as the owner of the wall to let/deny the people use my wall the way I see fit. Even more so when I informed everyone in advance [github.com] this may happen.

              The fact this interrupts one point from which your information flows towards others? Yes, it happens, but that is secondary to my right as an owner of the wall. It doesn't make it censorship, because I'm only taking a single poster and I'm not stopping you to place posters on other walls and neither I'm taking down the posters from other walls.

              --
              https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
              • (Score: 2) by Knowledge Troll on Thursday July 11 2019, @07:33AM (3 children)

                by Knowledge Troll (5948) on Thursday July 11 2019, @07:33AM (#865725) Homepage Journal

                This entire discussion reminds me of when conservatives absolutely freak out with the terms positive and negative liberty because their chosen form of liberty is labeled as "negative" so fuck those guys they are making judgement about my politics!

                Do you think that censorship is bad?

                • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Thursday July 11 2019, @07:44AM (2 children)

                  by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Thursday July 11 2019, @07:44AM (#865729) Journal

                  Do you think that censorship is bad?

                  I think the common sense should push many people in a common-sense type of self-censoring grafted on a "live and let live" attitude.
                  In the older days, these were called something like "respect" and "the traditions of the place". Rules that were not laws, but social conventions that made the community work with less frictions.
                  I feel sometimes we (as humanity) are losing more than we are gaining by breaking them and letting them behind us.

                  --
                  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
                  • (Score: 2) by Knowledge Troll on Thursday July 11 2019, @09:29AM (1 child)

                    by Knowledge Troll (5948) on Thursday July 11 2019, @09:29AM (#865753) Homepage Journal

                    I'm not quite sure what you mean here. What conventions are changing? Is the community the opensource community?

                    • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Thursday July 11 2019, @09:48PM

                      by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Thursday July 11 2019, @09:48PM (#865992) Journal

                      I'm not quite sure what you mean here.

                      Self-censoring in everyday life. Called 'civilized behaviour' otherwise. Dependent on good proportion on the values of people that make your social circle (open source included, if one is involved in open source)

                      What conventions are changing?

                      The values/behaviour of the people around.

                      ---
                      Look, i was trying to answer between the lines to your

                      Do you think that censorship is bad?

                      Now, to put it bluntly, the brief answer is 'Yes, I think censorship is bad, but I also think there are things much worse than censorship, even in so-called civilized world'

                      --
                      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford