Thread: Will "deepfakes" technology be used for false accusations?

If you haven't heard of Deepfakes, it works like this. It's basically the ability to photoshop a different face on another body in a video. It has its legit uses. For example, maybe you're filming a historical movie, and you want the President to really look like Franklin Roosevelt. Deepfakes can do that. However, its most common use is by pathetic loser simps. Some dude is obsessed over some actress or celebrity, but she hasn't made a sex tape, so the goober makes a fake one of her. The fakes can look really real.

It makes me wonder if some bitter, angry feminist would use Deepfakes tech to create "proof" that someone raped her. As long as she found some dude willing to cooperate who is the same approximate body build and stature of the guy she wants to accuse, she could pull it off. She could have a video of you refusing to take a "no" and then just overpowering her and fucking her.

There have been concerns over Deepfakes being used in political races. If you're a crook running for office, you could make a video of your opponent in a hotel room with a hooker.

It's already bad enough that they make fake porn videos of people. And I know that no one who participates here would be the type of lamer who would do that, but let me say something for the lurkers: Regardless of the temptation, please don't do that. That's hanging onto someone and obsessing over her. It will fuck you up. Don't do it.

It does make me worry if some bitch were revengeful enough to use that technology. You may have never touched her, you may never even have met her, but you could end up in a video raping her. And if you have a shitty attorney who can't prove it's fake, you would go away for a very long time.

Call me optimistic, but I'm wondering if that happened, an expert analyst could determine it is a fake. Of course, it would have to get that far in the first place, as I'm sure we've all heard about corrupt police ignoring or even wiping evidence which would have saved some poor soul.

Sounds like too much work for your average woman, but I guess that's what simp's are for.

Remember what Dilbert said about radioactivity, "it can be used for good or evil, and you don't want to get any on you."

Originally Posted by frog

Sounds like too much work for your average woman, but I guess that's what simp's are for.

Remember what Dilbert said about radioactivity, "it can be used for good or evil, and you don't want to get any on you."

It does sound like too much work, but I wouldn't be surprised the extent women will go to in order to fuck over a man. As the saying goes; "Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned."

Originally Posted by TheSisko

It does sound like too much work, but I wouldn't be surprised the extent women will go to in order to fuck over a man. As the saying goes; "Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned."

She'll just get a nerdy simp to do it for her. All she would have to offer him is one hour together with no clothes, and he would proceed with enthusiasm. He would probably be too lame to even negotiate that much. He would probably do it for a 20-min handjob.

When it gets cheap enough, it will. By that time hopefully there will be cheap, reliable ways to spot / counter deepfake technology.

20 minutes is a bit generous. You know he'd bust a nut in his pants the second her hand touched his zipper.

Actually not really, OP. 1st it's one of the reasons I'm staying as unnoticeable as possible. Act/ dress like I barely have a penny left in my pocket. 2nd I actually think your described situation is not that hard to disprove. Either the "movie" is very blurred so the attorney can seed reasonable doubt it was "you." Or if the body of the "actor" is clearly visible each human has distinct body characteristics. F.e. birthmarks, penis size, hair patterns. It'd suck but I'd undress in court to let everybody see that body doesn't match mine. 3rd I don't think most women are that smart to come up with such an idea, let alone fabricate a deep fake (yes: I get it: the simp could jump in). 4th women can't take accountability/ risk. So my best bet is a woman wouldn't risk it in case it goes south. 5th why would she go through the trouble at all? Only an accusation is enough to ruin an man's life. Or at least force him to court, make lots of expenses and wast lots of time and energy. That's when my 1st argument comes into place as well.

On the eve of Independence Day in America, I content myself with the knowledge that one of my forefathers probably shot one of Spooky's forefathers.

I'm out. Peace.
- Owen, 07.03.2022

Originally Posted by OwenWentFullMGTOW

The issue with deepfakes is that they take a lot of time to produce if you want a quality product. So, the reward has to be high. Combine that with the fact that if you get caught entering deepfakes as some sort of official evidence (which is quite possible; the technology is advanced but far from perfect), then you'll probably be up Shit Creek without a paddle for all manner of legal charges and legal actions. So, in theory, yes, it's possible. But I think the risks outweigh any possible reward for most people.

Unfortunately there's a world of difference between convincing a court of law and convincing public opinion.

I spent over a decade watching obviously faked images being shared millions of times on social media. A few examples here
10 viral photos from 2018 that were totally FAKE - ThatsNonsense.com

Originally Posted by OwenWentFullMGTOW

The issue with deepfakes is that they take a lot of time to produce if you want a quality product. So, the reward has to be high.

Combine that with the fact that if you get caught entering deepfakes as some sort of official evidence (which is quite possible; the technology is advanced but far from perfect), then you'll probably be up Shit Creek without a paddle for all manner of legal charges and legal actions.

So, in theory, yes, it's possible. But I think the risks outweigh any possible reward for most people.

We all know how women can "turn in the water works" and worm their way into probation. They'll do it to get revenge and smile as the jury dries their tears, pats them on the ass, and lets them off.

There is always some pantywaist judge that will let them off with a stern warning after a man's life has been left in ruins.

If I were representing a falsely accused defendant in court, I'd have a fake video of the prosecuting attorney leading a drag queen show in New York City all set to go, just to throw an ice cold bucket of Reasonable Doubt on the proceedings.

This is an interesting point. And yes, I think that such technologies could be used to create many kinds of false accusations, not only sexual.

And many other new technologies could be used against Mgtows, as I said before, and this is why supporting pro-Mgtow techs, like Artificial Wombs, Fembots and Male Pills should be central messages to spread to other men.

But if you think in a positive way, more technologies creating fake news against men could lead to more men to wake up when they find out the truth, and it could create more laws to put false accusers in jail. And by the way, more men would not easily trust in women words anymore (even if she has a video as a proof).

Right now deep fakes are getting so good it takes a computer to tell if the video is real or fake. Technology advances so quickly that I think deep fakes will be a big problem in the future for everything. I can see a vengeful woman talking one of her simps into making her a video to take down some man she has a problem with. Or even women making deep fakes for other women to "take down the patriarchy".

On the eve of Independence Day in America, I content myself with the knowledge that one of my forefathers probably shot one of Spooky's forefathers.

I'm out. Peace.
- Owen, 07.03.2022