The Internet is for Porn is a well known song from Avenue Q (predating wow)

Porn driving a lot of the things on the Internet (which isn't quite the same sentiment) long predates Avenue Q and almost certainly the Web. There was a fair bit of porn on many BBS systems as well--not video obviously.

Okay fine, who cares? The song is still from Avenue Q.

> Porn driving a lot of the things on the Internet long predates Avenue Q

Right, but "The internet is for porn" is also a specific song from the musical Avenue Q, and that's the song that's being sung in the WoW video linked above. So the parent poster wasn't talking about the sentiment in general, but the specific song being used.

Porn won't be left behind. The encumbents could be.

Just in case anybody doesn't know, "The Internet Is For Porn" is from the Tony-award winning musical Avenue Q. It's a lot more than a "WoW video".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avenue_Q

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lJRAXjHwnOk

Edit: Seeing sibling replies, I'm glad most people do know.

You whiffed on the context of the quote.

Reid isn't suggesting porn, the medium, will be left behind (just the opposite, really). She wants to make sure that porn, the people who make up the industry, are able to reap the benefits of AI. She wants to make sure at the very least that some unaffiliated AI project isn't just stealing these people's work, names, likenesses, etc., and selling it.

My bad and my apologies.

While I see her point, I think her point will fail.

An avid follower, 'connoisseur' if you prefer, of say Riley Reid may well recognise that she, or parts of her, are not real in whatever they are watching.

But if they do not care but they like what they see they will be back for more.

Her reaction is the same as mainstream actors concerned about voice reproduction, likeness reproduction and more.

One day (famous actor) will die. Later, they will headline a movie that people rave about. They are not dead yet, but ABBA Voyage.

Audrey Hepburn is long dead, but a certain chocolate brand exploits her.

AI will exploit those in entertainment because there is money there.

Porn or otherwise, I think nearly all the excitement in the AI space from 2024-2030 is going to happen in the courtroom, rather than the computer lab. A computer program that can generate infinite, believable episodes of Show Xyz is going to be made sometime in the future--it's a foregone conclusion, and I'll take that bet any day. The technical challenges on the path to getting there are relatively unexciting.

The question about who gets paid when I buy that program is going to take decades, maybe a lifetime to settle.

If you believe that a computer can and inevitably will create this content, it’s also a foregone conclusion that its origin will be obfuscated and diffuse. I can’t see how an actor working in country X will collect on use of their likeness generated by a computer in country Y. Similarly, if 10,000+ individuals with computers are producing infringing content, I fail to see how anyone could seek recompense with any effectiveness. Additionally, if the content is generated from a computer it would seem relatively simple to alter it just enough to call into doubt the likeness used and make it prohibitively difficult for an individual to claim it is in fact their identity and not a fictional derivative protected by some fair use laws. I’m not a copyright expert and I expect we’ll see attempts at legal battles as you suggest, but I expect they’ll pretty much go nowhere unless the ‘offending’ counterparty is seeking conflict, and the result will be a fundamental undermining of the authority that the current copyright system holds.

Edit: I think the closest approximation of a solution to the compensation/control questions re digital content in an age of on-demand generative AI will involve content creators of all stripes self-hosting and self-publishing to make it easy for fans to directly patronize. Trying to stop clones is a fool’s errand.

> One day (famous actor) will die. Later, they will headline a movie that people rave about.

Yep. This is one of the many things that I detest about how this technology will inevitably be used.

I have a problem with it at a deep level. It appears that the things about these technologies that excite people the most are those things that are direct attacks on reality. It's bad enough that large segments of society is already in a place where truth doesn't matter. Now comes tools to make it possible that reality itself doesn't matter anymore.

> She wants to make sure at the very least that some unaffiliated AI project isn't just stealing these people's work, names, likenesses, etc., and selling it.

Sounds like thinly veiled ludditism to me, why would it be necessary for AI porn to steal anybody’s likeness? I’m sure the 100% generated content is fine without any need for that.

It’s hard to drum up any sympathy for such an exploitative industry (exploitative for both the participants and the customers). Am I supposed to care that pornographers ability to profit of their unhealthy and addictive product is in jeopardy?

Yup. Seems pretty much on par with defending the profit margins of the tobacco industry.

> Sounds like thinly veiled ludditism to me, why would it be necessary for AI porn to steal anybody’s likeness?

Just look at what people currently do with the models. You already see a lot of deepfake attempts. This will only increase as the technology improves. If you can generate a scene from scratch people will ask it to generate a full porn movie with the actor/actress of their choice.

> It’s hard to drum up any sympathy for such an exploitative industry (exploitative for both the participants and the customers).

I think if you care about an actor losing income over AI generated works, you would naturally care about a porn actor losing income over this. Especially when the AI used your work as training data and might reproduce your likeness without you getting anything out of it. I can understand the dislike for the industry because parts of it prey on the weak to make money.

If we make a legal framework for movie actors it should also apply to pron actors.

> Just look at what people currently do with the models. You already see a lot of deepfake attempts. This will only increase as the technology improves. If you can generate a scene from scratch people will ask it to generate a full porn movie with the actor/actress of their choice.

Currently, people either make content with entirely generated personas, or make deepfake content of people who are not porn actresses at all. I've been following the commentary around this topic, and I've never even heard of somebody using AI to generate porn of people who are already porn actresses.

> I think if you care about an actor losing income over AI generated works, you would naturally care about a porn actor losing income over this.

In general I don't care about people losing their jobs to new technology. I do support the actors who were being strong-armed permanently signing away the rights to their likeness, and I sympathise with them, because what they do is valuable for society.

Apart from to the extent to which they themselves are exploited, I have no sympathy at all for pornography industry participants. What they do is detrimental to society, and generally revolves around exploiting their customers, especially the weird new parasocial only-fans model.

So none of the reasons why I might care about the actors union complaints apply to the porn industry.

> If we make a legal framework for movie actors it should also apply to pron actors.

There already is a legal framework for managing this. It is called personality rights or the right of publicity. There's no need at all for any new laws to regulate this.

> I recall seeing - many many years ago - a WoW video "The internet is for porn"

I remember that too… what was it, 15 years ago?

I definitely wasn’t expecting that video to resurface and be actually relevant lol

Porn has been influencing tech long before AI or the Internet.

"I see your kineograph of a galloping horse and raise you this one of a burlesque dancer."

>I recall seeing - many many years ago - a WoW video "The internet is for porn" . https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YRgNOyCnbqg

Relevant: <https://np.reddit.com/r/classicwow/comments/bmp1bt/why_im_ro...>

(Context: Retribution Paladin in "classic" (the original release of) World of Warcraft has weak attacks compared to other classes/specs.)