196
"Shame must change sides": a Belgian model warns about deepnudes
(www.euronews.com)
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 16 Mar 2024
196 points (100.0% liked)
News
23367 readers
2401 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
This is going to be a serious issue in the future - either society changes and these things are going to be accepted or these kind of generating ai models have to be banned. But that's still not going to be a "security" against it...
I also think we have to come up with digital watermarks that are easy to use...
Honestly, I see it as kinda freeing. Now people don't have to worry about nudes leaking any more, since you can just say they're fake. Somebody starts sending around deepfakes of me? OK, whatever, weirdo, it's not real.
I'm guessing it's easier to feel that way if your name is Justin.
If it was Justine, you might have issues.
Weird how that works.
Fair enough. Ideally it would be the same for women too, but we're not there as a society yet.
Such an empty response. Do you know that women have to do things on dates out of fear of being killed? Literally they have a rational fear of being killed by their male dates and it’s a commonly known and accepted fear that many women relate.
Society moving forward is a nice idea, women feeling safe is much better one and attitudes like yours are part of the reason women generally do not feel safe. Deepfakes are not freeing at all.
Bruh relax
I think there's a big difference between creating them and spreading them, and putting punishments on spreading nudes against someone's will, real or fake is a better 3rd option. The free speech implications of banning software that's capable of creating them is too broad and fuzzy, but I think that putting harsh penalties on spreading them on the grounds of harassment would be clear cut and effective. I didn't see a big difference in between spreading revenge porn and deep fakes and we already have laws against spreading revenge porn.
We gotta ban photo editing software too. Shit, we gotta ban computers entirely. Shit, now we have to ban electricity.
I'm so tired of this "Don't blame the tool" bs argument used to divert responsibility.
Blame the fucking tool and restrict it.
Why not blame the spread? You can't ban the tool, it's easily accessible software and that only requires easily accessible consumer hardware, and you can even semi easily train your own models using easily accessible porn on the Internet, so if you want to ban it outright, you'd need to ban the general purpose tool, all porn, and the knowledge to train image generation models. If you mean ban the online apps that sell the service on the cloud, I can get behind that, it would increase the bar to create them a little, but that is far from a solution.
But, we already have laws against revenge porn and Internet harassment. I think the better and more feasible approach that doesn't have far reaching free speech implications would be to simply put heavy penalties on spreading nudes images of people against their will, whether those images are real or fake. It's harassment as revenge porn, and I didn't see how it's different if it's a realistic fake. If there is major punishment for spreading these images then I think that will take care of discouraging the spread of the images for the vast majority of people.
Social media is a tool used to spread misinformation. Should social media be banned?
Sure.
So delete your account.
Social media as a business model? Yes, absolutely.
Is open source AI image generation a business model?
The companies that host and sell an online image to nude service using a tuned version of that tool specifically designed to convert images into nudes are definitely a business model.
I agree it's impractical and opens dangerous free speech problems to try and ban or regulate the general purpose software, but, I don't have a problem with regulating for profit online image generation services that have been advertising the ability to turn images into nudes and have even been advertising their service on non porn sites. Regulating those will at least raise the bar a bit and ensure that there's isn't a for profit motive where capitalism will encourage it happening even more.
We already have revenge porn laws that outlaw the spread of real nudes against someone's will, I don't see why the spread of fakes shouldn't be outlaws similarly.
And I think if those companies can be identified as making the offending image, they should be help liable. IMO, you shouldn’t be able to use a photo without the permission of the person.
I mean. It's worked so well with you so far, why not?
We should ban drawing too
Pencils are the tool of Satan!!!
With ai and digital art... What is real? What is a person? What is a cartoon or a similar but not same likeness? In some cases what even is nudity? How old is an ai image? How can anything then be legal or illegal?
Where did it say anything about a Ministry of Truth deciding what can be posted online? Making it illegal and having a 3rd party decide if every post is allowed are two very different things
If it’s illegal then there are ramifications for the platform, the user posting it, and the tool that created it.
Content moderation is already a thing so it’s nothing new. Just one more thing on the list to check for when a post is reported
Well, you’re about 20 years too late. It has already started
See any of the tor sites for examples of what is currently filtered out of the regular internet. It even gets your google account permanently banned if you log in via the tor browser
Yeah, sorry - I disagree on every level with your take.
I am also convinced that at least the LLMs will soon destroy themselves, due to the simple fact that "garbage in, garbage out".