3 ms·

> Upset about revenge porn? What if it's just a really close copy of your face/body generated by machine, stitched together in a very believable fashion? You co

by ardy42 6y ago

> Upset about revenge porn? What if it's just a really close copy of your face/body generated by machine, stitched together in a very believable fashion? You could maybe claim ownership of your likeness, but I don't think it's going to be possible to really enforce - Many people look near identical already. Or they add a mole here or there and claim - look - clearly not you! People make all kinds of claims all the time, including transparently self-serving ones like your example, but that doesn't mean anyone buys them. I'm pretty sure what's going to happen is the law will make it clear that porn generated from your likeness and distributed without your consent is as illegal as revenge porn. Then a bunch of people who did it anyway will go to jail and that will put a strong chilling effect on the whole thing. In most cases, the people with the motive an ability to make machine-generated porn of a particular person will be relatively easy to find.

horsawlarway 6y ago
Because we've seen this so clearly with fake celebrity porn? And those are folks with the actual resources to go after it in courts. > In most cases, the people with the motive an ability to make machine-generated porn of a particular person will be relatively easy to find. I just find this incredibly difficult to believe, unless this "ban on user content" extends to a ban on general computing. And maybe that's where we'll end up, but I think that's a much more malicious result than generated porn. Or maybe anonymity will disappear online, which I find fairly scary, but is another clear thrust we're seeing. Also - What about the absolutely bonkers industry that will be consent based generated porn? We're already headed that route now with 3d scanning of actors/actresses, and lord knows - I think a lot of folks in the porn industry would be happy to get digitally imaged and then not have to actually engage in the physical process of making porn. --- I think this is a real and genuine ethics question that we don't have good answers to right now. I don't really have a problem with PH pulling down anonymous user content (hell - private company, they can make their own decisions) but I also don't really think it's going to stop this kind of behavior, and it certainly doesn't untangle complex social questions around what's right and wrong in this space. I will say - I think we're undergoing another sexual revolution right now, it's just more subtle because it's less about what folks do or wear in public, and more about what folks do in private. I'm not entirely sure how you legislate on this topic either - What's art? What's porn? can you really "Know it when you see it"? What if you unintentionally make imagery that just resembles a real person? Those are all questions that depend on social context at the time they're legislated on, and they set a tone going forward. Basically - My whole point is that this is not some clear win, and again - I'm not entirely sure there's a win anywhere in this discussion. I think this is just PH skirting around the issue for monetary reasons because they happen to be big enough at this point that they can do without anonymous submissions. I will say - I'm fairly sure any "it's simple and this will solve it!" response is utter bullshit.
- ardy42 6y ago
  >> I'm pretty sure what's going to happen is the law will make it clear that porn generated from your likeness and distributed without your consent is as illegal as revenge porn. Then a bunch of people who did it anyway will go to jail and that will put a strong chilling effect on the whole thing. In most cases, the people with the motive an ability to make machine-generated porn of a particular person will be relatively easy to find. > I just find this incredibly difficult to believe, unless this "ban on user content" extends to a ban on general computing. And maybe that's where we'll end up, but I think that's a much more malicious result than generated porn. Or maybe anonymity will disappear online, which I find fairly scary, but is another clear thrust we're seeing. You're not thinking about this clearly, and are veering off into overreaction and catastrophizing. Machine-generated porn of celebrities is far harder to police, because they're celebrities. There are thousands, maybe millions, of people who have the desire and technical means to make porn of them. For regular people, the story is different. For the most part, no one's going to want to make porn of some random person they don't know. The only people with an interest in making or consuming machine-generated porn of a particular normal person are people who have some connection to them, which is a far smaller group. That makes enforcement possible with regular investigative tools. Enforcement doesn't even need to be 100% to be effective at creating a chilling effect, just make examples of some bitter and angry exes and creepy stalkers. Celebrities are also a pretty rarefied group. Once this problem starts affecting everyday people, there will be more electoral pressure for dealing with it legislatively, just like with revenge porn. At least some cases of "leaked celebrity sex tapes" would probably count as illegal revenge porn today.

by ardy42 6y ago

horsawlarway 6y ago

Because we've seen this so clearly with fake celebrity porn? And those are folks with the actual resources to go after it in courts. > In most cases, the people with the motive an ability to make machine-generated porn of a particular person will be relatively easy to find. I just find this incredibly difficult to believe, unless this "ban on user content" extends to a ban on general computing. And maybe that's where we'll end up, but I think that's a much more malicious result than generated porn. Or maybe anonymity will disappear online, which I find fairly scary, but is another clear thrust we're seeing. Also - What about the absolutely bonkers industry that will be consent based generated porn? We're already headed that route now with 3d scanning of actors/actresses, and lord knows - I think a lot of folks in the porn industry would be happy to get digitally imaged and then not have to actually engage in the physical process of making porn. --- I think this is a real and genuine ethics question that we don't have good answers to right now. I don't really have a problem with PH pulling down anonymous user content (hell - private company, they can make their own decisions) but I also don't really think it's going to stop this kind of behavior, and it certainly doesn't untangle complex social questions around what's right and wrong in this space. I will say - I think we're undergoing another sexual revolution right now, it's just more subtle because it's less about what folks do or wear in public, and more about what folks do in private. I'm not entirely sure how you legislate on this topic either - What's art? What's porn? can you really "Know it when you see it"? What if you unintentionally make imagery that just resembles a real person? Those are all questions that depend on social context at the time they're legislated on, and they set a tone going forward. Basically - My whole point is that this is not some clear win, and again - I'm not entirely sure there's a win anywhere in this discussion. I think this is just PH skirting around the issue for monetary reasons because they happen to be big enough at this point that they can do without anonymous submissions. I will say - I'm fairly sure any "it's simple and this will solve it!" response is utter bullshit.

ardy42 6y ago
>> I'm pretty sure what's going to happen is the law will make it clear that porn generated from your likeness and distributed without your consent is as illegal as revenge porn. Then a bunch of people who did it anyway will go to jail and that will put a strong chilling effect on the whole thing. In most cases, the people with the motive an ability to make machine-generated porn of a particular person will be relatively easy to find. > I just find this incredibly difficult to believe, unless this "ban on user content" extends to a ban on general computing. And maybe that's where we'll end up, but I think that's a much more malicious result than generated porn. Or maybe anonymity will disappear online, which I find fairly scary, but is another clear thrust we're seeing. You're not thinking about this clearly, and are veering off into overreaction and catastrophizing. Machine-generated porn of celebrities is far harder to police, because they're celebrities. There are thousands, maybe millions, of people who have the desire and technical means to make porn of them. For regular people, the story is different. For the most part, no one's going to want to make porn of some random person they don't know. The only people with an interest in making or consuming machine-generated porn of a particular normal person are people who have some connection to them, which is a far smaller group. That makes enforcement possible with regular investigative tools. Enforcement doesn't even need to be 100% to be effective at creating a chilling effect, just make examples of some bitter and angry exes and creepy stalkers. Celebrities are also a pretty rarefied group. Once this problem starts affecting everyday people, there will be more electoral pressure for dealing with it legislatively, just like with revenge porn. At least some cases of "leaked celebrity sex tapes" would probably count as illegal revenge porn today.