358

A Telegram user who advertises their services on Twitter will create an AI-generated pornographic image of anyone in the world for as little as $10 if users send them pictures of that person. Like many other Telegram communities and users producing nonconsensual AI-generated sexual images, this user creates fake nude images of celebrities, including images of minors in swimsuits, but is particularly notable because it plainly and openly shows one of the most severe harms of generative AI tools: easily creating nonconsensual pornography of ordinary people.

(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] ulterno@lemmy.kde.social 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I say stop antagonizing the AI.
The only difference between a skilled artist making it with Photoshop and someone using a Neural Net, is the amount of time and effort put into creating the instance.

If there are to be any laws against these, they need to apply to any and every fake that's convincing enough, no matter the technology used.


Don't blame the gunpowder for the dead person.
People were being killed by thrown stones before that.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] OozingPositron@feddit.cl 10 points 1 year ago

You don't even need to pay, some people do it for free on /b/

[-] Cris_Color@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

God, generative ai is such a fucking caustic technology. I honestly don't see anything positive and not disgusting enabled by this tech.

Edit: I see people don't agree, but like why can't ai stick to translating stuff and being useful rather than making horrifically unethical porn, taking the humanity out of art, and replacing peoples jobs with statistical content generation. I hate it here.

[-] Mubelotix@jlai.lu 6 points 1 year ago

You can call people disgusting over what they do with a tool, but the tool itself is just a tool, it can't be disgusting

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] reddithalation@sopuli.xyz 5 points 1 year ago

i liked ai when it was a bunch of researchers messing around, but commercialized ai is horrifying.

[-] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

It's stuff like this that makes me against copyright laws. To me it is clear and obvious that you own your own image, and it is far less obvious to me that a company can own an image whose creator drew multiple decades ago that everyone can identify. And yet one is protected and the other isn't.

What the hell do you own if not yourself? How come a corporation has more rights than we do?

[-] LodeMike@lemmy.today 5 points 1 year ago

This stuff should be defamation, full stop. There would need to be a law specifically saying you can't sign it away, though.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›
this post was submitted on 29 Mar 2024
358 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

68864 readers
3998 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS