Blog
False models for rapid fashion? What does AI clones mean for our work – and our identity
Apr
In the heart of Times Square in Up-to-date York there are signs of the artificial intelligence revolution (AI) in marketing. In the health supplements store, the British technological startup window, Hypervsn, presents holograms of a natural size. From behind a glass, Virtual humanoid avatar with bold pink hair Waves to passers -by.
Down the Street, H&M-Swedish Giant Rapid Fashion-offers a novel type of engaging shopping. The flagship store presents a room covered with mirrors equipped with virtual environments, encouraging buyers create content on social media while trying to goods.
And last month, H&M made waves with the latest AI undertaking: Cloning 30 real models with “Digital twin” technology.
These replicas generated by AI caused global emotions and debate. But because the digital replicas of real people are becoming more and more common, especially in paintings based on images such as fashion, urgent ethical Questions arise. They include talks about the future of work, compensation and identity in the cultural economy.
H&M
Explained the digital twins
On the energetic AI startup scene in Up-to-date York, in which technology, fashion and finances collide, the potential of digital twins meets optimism.
Developers, investors and brands believe that by cloning our human bodies and personality, we can reach the future in which we live in a “double time”. This time would look like we would return to our sofa when they rest, while our identical avatars appear to work on our behalf. But is it really so straightforward?
What does it mean for employees whose identity is cloned without clear guidelines for compensation, property and rights?
Digital Twin Production is a careful process that begins with a unique identity of a person. This includes their voice, personality, body and face, all things considered their intellectual property (IP).
When someone signs for cloning with a digital twin startup, they agree to the apply of a generative AI recreating everything about their physical body: personal identity, separate features and skills.
Ethical questions
The appearance of digital twins forced the development of novel ethical frames, still in the structure. Industry leader Natalie Monbiot, former Hourone co -founder, came up with this date “Virtual human economy” Describe this developing sector.
Companies such as Hourone, Synthesia and Soul Machines compete for the dominance of this space. They offer digital twins for application, from fashion modeling to training films and online education.
Ethical challenges are significant, especially in terms of property.
(AP Photo/John Locher)
For example, the human half of the Digital H&M models will receive “sincere compensation”, including continuous payment for using their digital replicas outside the initial creation. The company said that the models would keep certain rights to apply their similarities, but industry standards for such contracts remain inconsistent.
Most digital twin companies establish contracts in which the human “original” receives the initial compensation for the creation process. This usually includes extensive scanning, voice recording and intercepting movement.
But such findings remain inconsistent in the entire industry, and the long -term proposal of the values of these digital similarities is still unclear.
Some companies offer license fees structures, while others buy full rights in advance. This raises questions about the sincere valuation of the digital similarity of a person.
Conventional contracts for image rights, borrowed from the entertainment industry, do not take into account the ability of AI to generate creative content by means of a person’s similarity. The industry essentially creates its ethical standards in real time, and some companies adopt more see-through approaches than others.
“Jackpot” economy means that they all take
For employees in paintings based on paintings, such as models and photographers, the augment in digital twins brings a fundamental shift in the structure of the workforce and compensation. Although modeling has always been hyperconal, social media has intensified dramatically and now they play a substantial role in allocating opportunities.
American party scholar Andrew Ross defines this dynamics as “Jackpot economy,” Where intellectual property It becomes a “shiny prize for few joyful”, while most are in the face of increased pre -initial.
American fashion scholar Minh-Ha Pham also wrote about how digital technologies strengthen the winners-Way-All Structure under Fashion and blog industries. Describes concentrated possibilities and prizes among the elite minority.
To add to this, Rachel Berryman and Misha Kavka, Up-to-date Zealand scientists showed how they showed how The increase in the relationship of “parasites” has become more and more central to the success of the career in these areas. The relationship of parasites describes the sense of intimate followers of connections against influential and celebrities.
In other words, those who are successful digital twins could continue to concentrate power between models that already have significant observations and culturally. This cachet allows them to multiply their paid potential, while people with less visibility fight for competing with both people and alternatives generated by AI.
Read more: Influence generated AI: Up-to-date wave of cultural exploitation
Breed, sexuality and gender
This concentration effect is particularly disturbing when considering how breed, sexuality and sex representation manifests itself in virtual spaces.
For almost a decade, fully virtual fashion models, such as Shudu, are becoming more and more popular. Shudu has over 237,000 watching on Instagram and partnerships with such brands such as Balmain, Louis Vuitton and Furla. Shudu and others showed how digital avatars often flatten and commercialize identity. They present disinfected versions of racial diversity and sex, which serve the interests of the brand rather than an original representation.
While digital twins based on actual people can provide more original representation than fully synthetic avatars, they still risk strengthening existing unevenness that receive visibility and compensation.
On the other hand, digital twin can potentially offer improvements compared to purely synthetic virtual models.
By maintaining a connection with real people who can negotiate their representation and compensation, digital twins can provide a more fair approach than avatars generated by computer in full from the recognition of the corporation.
There are real problems behind the digital charm
Our collective fascination with technology and novel digital twins driven by AI can distract us from the more burning (but venerable) problem. Let’s not forget to look at the economic structures that rule work cultures, human creativity and work norms.
The debate is not only prohibiting or regulating AI, which enable phenomena such as digital twins; It is also about how we provide sincere compensation and fair access to these novel forms of labor.
“Jackpot economy” often benefits only a few selected ones, leaving the majority in uncertain positions. As the twins’ digital technologies evolve, we must develop regulatory frames to ensure sincere compensation for employees in inventive industries.
While we focus on the possibilities and potentials of artificial intelligence, we also need to change the conversation towards economic systems and power structures in which these technologies operate.
