Climate change is a current and very urgent topic getting a lot of attention. When discussing the reasons for it the enormous amount of wastage produced by the global community is often mentioned as the main factor enhancing the negative developments. In fact, studies estimate that about eight million metric tonnes enter the oceans from land each year. This poses a serious risk to a wide variety of marine animals and through the food chain also to on land animals and even to humans (World Economic Forum, 2016).

Fortunately, however, the human species found a method to reduce the amount of waste produced and ending up in the oceans. We call it the waste hierarchy and it includes “Reduce, Reuse, and Recycle”. Recycling refers to converting waste materials into new materials and objects and recycling bins are very common. Yet, the actual rate of recycling is still extremely low and this is mostly due to the fact that waste is not sorted properly and, hence, can not be disposed or re-used easily. In fact, countries known as sustainability forerunners like Denmark still only recycle about 44% of municipal waste (OECD, 2019). However, the advancement of technology and the introduction of smart sorting waste bins might be the solution to increasing these rates heavily without the need for a dramatic behavioural change (McQuarrie, 2019). For example, the Kickstarter project ‘Oscar’ promises a next-generation trash receptacle.

By using several smart sensors, cameras and artificial intelligent algorithms products can be assessed and sorted accordingly (McQuarrie, 2018). This is just one example among several new providers offering fully automated trash cans that do not only sort the trash but for example can also automatically drive in front of the house when a pick-up is scheduled (Haar, 2017). The inventors promise that these novel products will not only help society to recycle more and, hence, become more sustainable but also that they will save time and money (Haar, 2017). Yet, the question remains whether these products will be able to fully function soon enough to save the planet.

Kate Moss modelled for Armani, Alexander McQueen, Calvin Klein and an endless number of other prestigious companies. She is one of the most successful models in the world and her name is well-known far-beyond the fashion industry. Models, such as Kate Moss, Kendall Jenner and Gisele Bündchen embody the dream of a luxury and light-hearted model life. In fact, a lot of teenage girls have posters of their idols hung up on their walls reflecting their one and only dream to once also become as famous and successful as they are. Becoming a famous model has even become a TV event through various casting shows looking for “Miss America” or “Germany’s Next Topmodel”. Yet, just as technology changes all fields of our lives this could also happen in the modelling industry.

What if Daisy Page is the world’s next Gisele Bündchen? A casting show host would definitely say that the 19-year-old model has potential. Nevertheless, she could not take on runway jobs because Daisy Page is the first 100% computer-generated model signed to a major international agency (McQuarrie, 2019). She embodies the potential of AI generated models in this industry. Yet, she is not the first “fake” model. In fact, the industry behind AI generated convincing looks is growing rapidly. For example, an agency is offering 100,000 free AI-generated headshots to use as stock footage (Porter,2019). While the quality of these headshots is still not as advanced as single model pictures, it does have the potential to be a true alternative to actual stock footage. See for yourself in the video below.

While it is a fact that classical fashion models, presenting the newest trends can easily be replaced by computer-generated people, there remain some ethical concerns (McQuarrie, 2019). Firstly, all AI created pictures are based on data from real photographs. Hence, how can we be sure that the algorithm will not create a “fake” person looking seemingly the same as an existing person? In such a case privacy rights would be endangered. Secondly, once reality and the artificial world blur the beauty ideal will probably be heavily influenced by non-existing beautiful people. This is especially dangerous for young people and could lead to even more social pressure. Hence, the question comes up whether computer-generated models should be further supported to enhance technological advancement or should be limited by legislation?