5 ms·

Unfortunately, the price will go down pushing the supply/demand curve out, and we'll get ever more garbage. Some of it will be dangerous or addictive to suscept

by kurthr 4y ago

Unfortunately, the price will go down pushing the supply/demand curve out, and we'll get ever more garbage. Some of it will be dangerous or addictive to susceptible portions of society, mostly just boring and stupid to the rest of us. Wait for first kid who dies trying an AI generated "challenge" or the first violent mob killing caused by AI generated outrage porn. AI generated video porn may look like triple breasted whores of Eroticon6 today, but with sufficient influencer content (playground videos) and porn (dungeon) footage, I suspect you can generate more than enough novel and relevant (child S&M) porn for everyone.

idiotsecant 4y ago
To play devil's advocate: If AI is producing content that would be morally objectionable because it harms someone, but nobody was harmed in the making of it, are we still right to find it morally objectionable?
- adenozine 4y ago
  In terms of enjoyment, yes. In terms of overall harm reduction, no. It's still a bad thing for humanity at large but it may have a knock-on effect of pacifying people who would otherwise pay significant amounts of money for new content to be produced. If we can placate those people, at least the money dries up for those other sources and maybe they would move on to doing something other than harming children. Tricky spot, to be sure.
  - onlyrealcuzzo 4y ago
    How do you know if an AI porn character is 17 or 18?
    - NoToP 4y ago
      How do you know when a porn character is 17 or 18?
      - 8f2ab37a-ed6c 4y ago
        You find out in court: https://nypost.com/2010/04/24/a-trial-star-is-porn/ https://nypost.com/2010/04/24/a-trial-star-is-porn/
  - 8f2ab37a-ed6c 4y ago
    I don’t understand why procedurally generated porn of made up humans is harmful to someone. How is this different from video games that allow you to shoot and stab thousands of virtual people without any proven deleterious effect on real life?
    - kaashif 4y ago
      I think sexuality is different to violence. I've heard plenty of stories about people developing weird kinks from porn, or having to turn to weirder and weirder stuff to get off. But I haven't heard of any cases of video games turning people violent. This is extremely unscientific, I know.
      - 8f2ab37a-ed6c 4y ago
        Unfortunately I don't think we have data here to make conclusions, only a few moral intuitions, which historically haven't been the most reliable compasses for navigating these grey areas.
      - fennecfoxy 4y ago
        Nah, compare violence in media by sex/age breakdown of the victim. Excluding sexual stuff completely, it's many, many orders of magnitude more acceptable to show the gory killing of a male character on screen than it is to show the same of a woman or child. There are all of these unwritten but extremely obvious rules that dictate what is acceptable & what is not.
      - idiotsecant 4y ago
        OK, let's assume your argument is correct. (which I don't think is true, but let's go with that for now) Let's say that media depicting some kinds of sexual material warps what gives some people sexual satisfaction. ...so? Should my preferences of what I find acceptable and not acceptable in that domain somehow influence what content others are allowed to consume? If the creation of that content actively causes harm, then sure. That content should be restricted. If we are restricting it because you think it's icky and it might lead to other things you find icky than we took a wrong turn somewhere. That's like saying we should outlaw mozzarella cheese because it might lead to the consumption of triple cheese sausage pizza. Neither of those acts hurt me, so why should I care about people choosing to participate in either?
  - idiotsecant 4y ago
    I think it's important to differentiate something that is personally icky to you and something that is 'bad for humanity at large' unless you can demonstrate how it's bad for humanity at large and demonstrate why that makes it morally objectionable. Morally objectionable acts require (IMO) a victim. I think it's essential that before we decide that we are going to limit what people can do we determine if what they're doing is actually hurting someone to the extent that society should limit that behavior or if we're just limiting their behavior because it's different from ours and we don't like it. In my personal moral worldview, if a person can simulate a universe with no actual people in it in which they commit whatever debauchery they feel necessary without causing harm to anyone else, I say have fun. It has literally no measurable impact on me, so it would be immoral for me to insert my personal preferences into the matter.
- kurthr 4y ago
  If your 10 year old dies because of an AI created Tide-pod or Street-surfing challenge, I think you'll find it objectionable. Same for highly targeted fake news clickbait that causes a race riot.
  - fennecfoxy 4y ago
    Why does said 10 year old child have unfettered access to the internet? Also why is an AI ultimately responsible for a child choosing to perform some challenge? What if the 10 year old child played amogus & then decided to re-enact irl? I'd say it's less the source of a challenge or false factoid etc and more a cultural problem of no monitoring kids enough; parents give their kids phones & let 'em use TikTok to their heart's content cause it keeps the kids quiet. And immature kids love TT because it's easy to generate clout and therefore dopamine.
    - logifail 4y ago
      > Why does said 10 year old child have unfettered access to the internet? Q: Of the kids in my 13 year-old's class, what % would you guess have WhatsApp on their phone? Spoiler: "If you live in a country in the European Economic Area (which includes the European Union), and any other included country or territory (collectively referred to as the European Region), you must be at least 16 years old (or such greater age required in your country) to register for and use WhatsApp"[0] [0] https://faq.whatsapp.com/695318248185629 https://faq.whatsapp.com/695318248185629
    - kurthr 4y ago
      Why does it need to be unfettered? They have peers. Kids smoke/drink and it's literally illegal to sell them cigarettes/alcohol. A significant percent of adults are also susceptible to crazed conspiracy theories... see QAnon. Now allow AI automation to target individuals and small groups to "optimize engagement" with apparently personal communications using A/B statistics. Everywhere all the time, because it's cheap, because it pays the rent. Some of them will be drawn to artificially generated violence inciting agit prop, because it works. There are negative externalities to that.
    - 4y ago

by kurthr 4y ago

idiotsecant 4y ago

To play devil's advocate: If AI is producing content that would be morally objectionable because it harms someone, but nobody was harmed in the making of it, are we still right to find it morally objectionable?

adenozine 4y ago
In terms of enjoyment, yes. In terms of overall harm reduction, no. It's still a bad thing for humanity at large but it may have a knock-on effect of pacifying people who would otherwise pay significant amounts of money for new content to be produced. If we can placate those people, at least the money dries up for those other sources and maybe they would move on to doing something other than harming children. Tricky spot, to be sure.
- onlyrealcuzzo 4y ago
  How do you know if an AI porn character is 17 or 18?
  - NoToP 4y ago
    How do you know when a porn character is 17 or 18?
    - 8f2ab37a-ed6c 4y ago
      You find out in court: https://nypost.com/2010/04/24/a-trial-star-is-porn/ https://nypost.com/2010/04/24/a-trial-star-is-porn/
- 8f2ab37a-ed6c 4y ago
  I don’t understand why procedurally generated porn of made up humans is harmful to someone. How is this different from video games that allow you to shoot and stab thousands of virtual people without any proven deleterious effect on real life?
  - kaashif 4y ago
    I think sexuality is different to violence. I've heard plenty of stories about people developing weird kinks from porn, or having to turn to weirder and weirder stuff to get off. But I haven't heard of any cases of video games turning people violent. This is extremely unscientific, I know.
    - 8f2ab37a-ed6c 4y ago
      Unfortunately I don't think we have data here to make conclusions, only a few moral intuitions, which historically haven't been the most reliable compasses for navigating these grey areas.
    - fennecfoxy 4y ago
      Nah, compare violence in media by sex/age breakdown of the victim. Excluding sexual stuff completely, it's many, many orders of magnitude more acceptable to show the gory killing of a male character on screen than it is to show the same of a woman or child. There are all of these unwritten but extremely obvious rules that dictate what is acceptable & what is not.
    - idiotsecant 4y ago
      OK, let's assume your argument is correct. (which I don't think is true, but let's go with that for now) Let's say that media depicting some kinds of sexual material warps what gives some people sexual satisfaction. ...so? Should my preferences of what I find acceptable and not acceptable in that domain somehow influence what content others are allowed to consume? If the creation of that content actively causes harm, then sure. That content should be restricted. If we are restricting it because you think it's icky and it might lead to other things you find icky than we took a wrong turn somewhere. That's like saying we should outlaw mozzarella cheese because it might lead to the consumption of triple cheese sausage pizza. Neither of those acts hurt me, so why should I care about people choosing to participate in either?
- idiotsecant 4y ago
  I think it's important to differentiate something that is personally icky to you and something that is 'bad for humanity at large' unless you can demonstrate how it's bad for humanity at large and demonstrate why that makes it morally objectionable. Morally objectionable acts require (IMO) a victim. I think it's essential that before we decide that we are going to limit what people can do we determine if what they're doing is actually hurting someone to the extent that society should limit that behavior or if we're just limiting their behavior because it's different from ours and we don't like it. In my personal moral worldview, if a person can simulate a universe with no actual people in it in which they commit whatever debauchery they feel necessary without causing harm to anyone else, I say have fun. It has literally no measurable impact on me, so it would be immoral for me to insert my personal preferences into the matter.
kurthr 4y ago
If your 10 year old dies because of an AI created Tide-pod or Street-surfing challenge, I think you'll find it objectionable. Same for highly targeted fake news clickbait that causes a race riot.
- fennecfoxy 4y ago
  Why does said 10 year old child have unfettered access to the internet? Also why is an AI ultimately responsible for a child choosing to perform some challenge? What if the 10 year old child played amogus & then decided to re-enact irl? I'd say it's less the source of a challenge or false factoid etc and more a cultural problem of no monitoring kids enough; parents give their kids phones & let 'em use TikTok to their heart's content cause it keeps the kids quiet. And immature kids love TT because it's easy to generate clout and therefore dopamine.
  - logifail 4y ago
    > Why does said 10 year old child have unfettered access to the internet? Q: Of the kids in my 13 year-old's class, what % would you guess have WhatsApp on their phone? Spoiler: "If you live in a country in the European Economic Area (which includes the European Union), and any other included country or territory (collectively referred to as the European Region), you must be at least 16 years old (or such greater age required in your country) to register for and use WhatsApp"[0] [0] https://faq.whatsapp.com/695318248185629 https://faq.whatsapp.com/695318248185629
  - kurthr 4y ago
    Why does it need to be unfettered? They have peers. Kids smoke/drink and it's literally illegal to sell them cigarettes/alcohol. A significant percent of adults are also susceptible to crazed conspiracy theories... see QAnon. Now allow AI automation to target individuals and small groups to "optimize engagement" with apparently personal communications using A/B statistics. Everywhere all the time, because it's cheap, because it pays the rent. Some of them will be drawn to artificially generated violence inciting agit prop, because it works. There are negative externalities to that.
  - 4y ago