418
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 08 Dec 2023
418 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
58160 readers
3101 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
That the chat is full of people defending this is disgusting. This is different than cutting someone’s face out of a photo and pasting it on a magazine nude or imagining a person naked. Deepfakes can be difficult to tell apart from real media. This enables the spread of nonconsensual pornography that an arbitrary person cannot necessarily tell is fake. Even if it were easy to tell, it’s an invasion of privacy to use someone’s likeness against their will without their consent for the purposes you’re using it for.
The fediverse’s high expectations for privacy seem to go right out the window when violating it gets their dick hard. We should be better.
What are you arguing with here? No one is saying that. Stop looking for trouble, it's weird.
Very much "old man yells at clouds" vibe from them
Nah tbh there are a few comments on this post asking for links to the tools
They were when the post was new. Things change as more people come in.
No there weren't.
Anyone reading through comments and timestamps can tell there were but you die on this hill if you want. This conversation overall is hilarious
I responded to your post very shortly after you posted it, and there weren't. You can post links in response, but you can't because you were angry for no reason.
https://lemmy.world/comment/5895283
Great, a joke post. That's what you're angry about?
"Full of" my arse.
I'm a different person, i'm just giving you a link, heres another tho https://lemmy.world/comment/5896051
Is it? Usually photography in public places is legal.
Legal and moral are not the same thing.
Do you also think it's immoral to do street photography?
I think it’s immoral to do street photography to sexualize the subjects of your photographs. I think it’s immoral to then turn that into pornography of them without their consent. I think it’s weird you don’t. If you can’t tell the difference between street photography and using and manipulating photos of people (public or otherwise) into pornography I can’t fuckin help you
If you go to a park, take photos of people, then go home and masturbate to them you need to seek professional help.
What's so moronic about people like you, is you think that anyone looking to further understand an issue outside of your own current thoughts, clearly is a monster harming people in the worst way you can conjure in your head. The original person saying it's weird you're looking for trouble couldn't have been more dead on.
This is an app that creates nude deepfakes of anyone you want it to. It’s not comparable to street photography in any imaginable way. I don’t have to conjure any monsters bro I found one and they’re indignant about being called out as a monster.
This has been done with Photoshop for decades. Photocollage for a hundred years before that. Nobody is arguing that it's not creepy. It's just that nothing has changed.
Well yeah if you share the photo it's messed up. Is anyone saying otherwise?
So it’s fine to violate someone’s privacy so long as you don’t share it? Weird morals you got there.
Am I violating privacy by picturing women naked?
Because if it's as cut and dried as you say, then the answer must be yes, and that's flat out dumb
I don't see this as a privacy issue and I'm not sure how you're squeezing it into that. I am not sure what it is, but you cannot violate a person's privacy by imagining or coding an image of them. It's weird creepy and because it can be mistaken for a real image, not proper to share.
Can you actually stop clutching pearls for a moment to think this through a little better?
Sexualizing strangers isn’t a right or moral afforded to you by society. That’s a braindead take. You can ABSOLUTELY violate someone’s privacy by coding an image of them. That’s both a moral and legal question with an answer.
Your comment is a self report.
Projection. Since you have no room for new thoughts in your head, I consider this a block request.
Being accused by you of projection is legitimately high comedy
So it's okay to make nudes of someone as long as they aren't realistic?
Where is the line drawn between being too real and not real enough?
If you found out that someone had made a bunch of art of you naked you’d probably think that was weird. I’d argue you shouldn’t do that without consent. Draw lines wherever you think is best.
I'd definitely think it was weird! And probably not hang out with them anymore (unless it was really good!)
But I don't think there should be a law against them doing that. I can moderate them myself by avoiding them and my friends will follow suit.
At that point, all they have are nudes of me that nobody I care about will pay attention to. It's a good litmus test for shitbags!
This is about producing convincing nude reproductions of other people, however. It has a very different psychological impact.
This technology allows someone to make pornography of anyone else and spread that pornography on the internet. It can cause massive distress, trauma, and relationship issues and impact peoples careers.
Your freedom to make nude ai images of other people is not worth that. I don't understand why anyone would think it was okay.
Agreed, but legal and moral are different. The law isn’t really about right and wrong per se.
People need better online safety education. Why TF are people even posting public pictures of themselves?
Are you really going with "it's the women's fault for existing"?
Im saying, as a man, I would never post my image and identity online.
Unfortunately sounds like par for the course for the internet. I've come to believe that the internet has its good uses for things like commerce and general information streaming, but by and large it's bringing out the worst in humanity far more than the best. Or it's all run by ultra-horny psychopathic teenagers pretending to be adults yet living on a philosophy of "I'm 13 and this is deep" logic.
I dunno why I am perpetually surprised about this though. This is such a cut and dry moral area and the people who say it isn’t are so clearly telling on themselves it’s kind of shocking, but I guess it shouldn’t be
I think the distinction is that half of the thread is treating it as a moral issue, and half of it is treating it as a legal issue. Legally, there's nothing wrong here.