As a rational person, everything about the photos is obviously fake. Take a look at this website: thispersondoesnotexist.com . You can see a new victim of communism each time you refresh the page. It's easy to create such images, but here they didn't make much effort to differentiate them and there's some slamdunk obvious fakes.
>Which is evidence of what? Generally, when booking photos are taken, the subject is asked to look at a single spot to preserve consistency and identifiability.
I'm starting to think you're being dishonest with me and perhaps yourself. This is a silly reason to claim that eyes would be at the same pitch, and besides, the people having exactly the same clothes in the same places? Multiple people?
This one has to be my favourite: https://www.xinjiangpolicefiles.org/wp-content/uploads/dt_im...
This one is where the AI doesn't know human anatomy and the head doesn't connect to the body correctly:
https://www.xinjiangpolicefiles.org/wp-content/uploads/dt_im...
Here's one where it couldn't decide if the glasses existed or not:
https://www.xinjiangpolicefiles.org/wp-content/uploads/dt_im...
I know it's hard to face up to the shattering of the illusion of BBC impartiality (and all of western media in general) and especially the scale of the lies being pushed at you, but you need to be able to do this as a grown adult in 2022. You can't even claim that the BBC have been fooled, they are overtly and openly using Adrian Zenz as a source. Talk about "sketchy". It's interesting that you didn't call the BBC's fundamentalist-christian homophobic racist source, "sketchy".
As a rational person, the existence of thispersondoesnotexist.com has as much bearing on the realness of these photos as it does on the realness of any other photo that exists.
I thought you might have at least a stretched-but-plausible argument but this is just not even worthy of consideration.
> I know it's hard to face up to the shattering of the illusion of BBC impartiality (and all of western media in general)…
I have no allusions about the impartiality and bias of media - western or otherwise. The existence of bias does not invalidate the existence of facts. Even a biased news outlet is often correct (with details missing that must be filled in from elsewhere, which is distinctly different from reporting pure falsehoods). But we don’t have to just rely on the BBC here - this is a well covered issue at this point.
> …and especially the scale of the lies being pushed at you
The real question is, are you aware of the scale of the lies pushed by your own government?
At this point I’m not interested in continuing to defend against logical fallacies from an obvious mouthpiece of the Chinese state, so I’m not planning to reply again. But if in the very slight chance that you’re just some Irish guy who hates the west, ask yourself what elevates your own unsubstantiated claims above those of career journalists and human rights organizations. Ask yourself if you’re comfortable siding with a potentially genocidal but definitely authoritarian state.
The one where "it couldn't decide if the glasses existed or not" probably shows a woman wearing cochlear implants behind her ears.
There's many many more pictures like this. They're fake people.
As a photographer, what about these images is obviously fake?
> All the eyes are at an identical pitch
Which is evidence of what? Generally, when booking photos are taken, the subject is asked to look at a single spot to preserve consistency and identifiability.
> when you go to the source you'll find many of them wearing exactly the same clothes, with exactly the same creases.
I find it very unsurprising that people in a prison situation are wearing the same clothes.
All of my clothing is also creased in the same places, but this is no big conspiracy, there are just popular ways of folding clothes…
I’m always interested in getting the whole story, but you’re going to need to share a less sketchy link…