4 ms·

> A Washington Post piece recounts how a small-town school teacher lost her job after students’ parents learned about AI porn made in the teacher’s likeness wit

> A Washington Post piece recounts how a small-town school teacher lost her job after students’ parents learned about AI porn made in the teacher’s likeness without her consent. Just a few months ago, a 22-year-old was sentenced to six months in jail for taking underage womens’ photos from social media and using them to create sexually explicit deepfakes. Following the link [0]: > People viewing explicit images of you without your consent — whether those images are real or fake — is a form of sexual violence, said Kristen Zaleski, director of forensic mental health at Keck Human Rights Clinic at the University of Southern California. Victims are often met with judgment and confusion from their employers and communities, she said. For example, Zaleski said she’s already worked with a small-town schoolteacher who lost her job after parents learned about AI porn made in the teacher’s likeness without her consent. > “The parents at the school didn’t understand how that could be possible,” Zaleski said. “They insisted they didn’t want their kids taught by her anymore.” Holy shit that's fucked up. It wouldn't be right but I'd be hard pressed not to create deep-fakes of the people who fired me and/or the parents to show them how bullshit it is if I was fired for something I had no connection to and was actually the victim of. [0] https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/02/13/ai-porn-deepfakes-women-consent/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/02/13/ai-porn...

wmf 3y ago
Seems like a clear case of wrongful termination.
- masklinn 3y ago
  At will employment being the law of the land, the only way to actually get a case of wrongful termination is to document that you’re firing the person for one of the few reasons which are unlawful (race, religion, sex, origin, disability, medical condition, or age, as well as additional restrictions the state may have in place). “The parents are complaining and we’re chickenshits” is almost certainly not an unlawful reason, if they even bother justifying the dismissal (which most employers don’t).
  - michaelt 3y ago
    I'm a little surprised this teacher didn't have the support of a union. I was under the impression a lot of teachers were unionised in the United States.
    - belorn 3y ago
      There are 4 millions teachers in the united states, or about 2.5% of the total work force. There are a lot of small-town school teachers, with a subset that are not in a union.
    - flangola7 3y ago
      In Texas it's illegal for them to form a union.
- anigbrowl 3y ago
  Indeed, but it's not just an issue with some obtuse administrator. School boards are heavily politicized these days, and if complaining parents were told that there was no good legal basis to terminate someone, it's entirely possible that they'd crowd the school board meeting and make a big stink about it. Factuality does not matter to a lot of people.
  - School-Cotton 3y ago
    Yet another example of why the uniquely American institution that is the fractal of hyper-local jurisdictions is harmful. Education should be run by the state, like it is in normal countries.
  - wmf 3y ago
    Yeah, it's clear that this teacher cannot teach any more but they should at least receive a buyout.
    - ithkuil 3y ago
      Sadly this teacher can't teach anymore but these parents can still parent. I wonder what happens if somebody makes some deep fake porn of these parents, will they divorce from their spouses, no longer be accepted in their communities? What if everybody's deep fakes are made so that everybody gets the same treatment; would that make people sink in that this is just it, just something that can happen to anybody without any fault of their own?
      - wmf 3y ago
        Karens have unlimited capacity for hypocrisy.
        woleium 3y ago
        Wilhoit's law This quotation is often incorrectly attributed to Francis M. Wilhoit: Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.
canadianwriter 3y ago
If they told the parents they were photoshopped instead of AI made, would that have changed anything? Curious if we change the language used if that changes how people think of it...
golol 3y ago
> People viewing explicit images of you without your consent — whether those images are real or fake — is a form of sexual violence. What if you imagine it? What if you describe it to your friend? What if you sketch it on your tablet and then delete it?
- wmf 3y ago
  That's thotcrime.
- krastanov 3y ago
  I am sure there is a line that is difficult to draw between what is ok and what is not, but can we not at least agree that there are two very different extremes easily separated by any such line: - most folks probably will agree that imagining sexual content with your teacher and keeping it to yourself is fine - most folks probably will also agree that making photorealistic fake porn of your teacher and spreading it around is akin to defamation or sexual harassment Let's take care of the extremes, then we can worry about the difficult middle.
  - Fire-Dragon-DoL 3y ago
    What about talking with somebody else about wanting to have sex with the teacher, even the whole class? I'm asking on purpose to figure out where the line is
    - krastanov 3y ago
      I do not know. However, we can take care of 90% of the problems in this context without having an answer to your question, because most cases are far from the dividing line.
  - golol 3y ago
    Yea but the spreading around is the important part. Should just creating the content be illegal? Right now it kinda is but I don't find that to be quite consistent.
- 3y ago

wmf 3y ago

Seems like a clear case of wrongful termination.

masklinn 3y ago
At will employment being the law of the land, the only way to actually get a case of wrongful termination is to document that you’re firing the person for one of the few reasons which are unlawful (race, religion, sex, origin, disability, medical condition, or age, as well as additional restrictions the state may have in place). “The parents are complaining and we’re chickenshits” is almost certainly not an unlawful reason, if they even bother justifying the dismissal (which most employers don’t).
- michaelt 3y ago
  I'm a little surprised this teacher didn't have the support of a union. I was under the impression a lot of teachers were unionised in the United States.
  - belorn 3y ago
    There are 4 millions teachers in the united states, or about 2.5% of the total work force. There are a lot of small-town school teachers, with a subset that are not in a union.
  - flangola7 3y ago
    In Texas it's illegal for them to form a union.
anigbrowl 3y ago
Indeed, but it's not just an issue with some obtuse administrator. School boards are heavily politicized these days, and if complaining parents were told that there was no good legal basis to terminate someone, it's entirely possible that they'd crowd the school board meeting and make a big stink about it. Factuality does not matter to a lot of people.
- School-Cotton 3y ago
  Yet another example of why the uniquely American institution that is the fractal of hyper-local jurisdictions is harmful. Education should be run by the state, like it is in normal countries.
- wmf 3y ago
  Yeah, it's clear that this teacher cannot teach any more but they should at least receive a buyout.
  - ithkuil 3y ago
    Sadly this teacher can't teach anymore but these parents can still parent. I wonder what happens if somebody makes some deep fake porn of these parents, will they divorce from their spouses, no longer be accepted in their communities? What if everybody's deep fakes are made so that everybody gets the same treatment; would that make people sink in that this is just it, just something that can happen to anybody without any fault of their own?
    - wmf 3y ago
      Karens have unlimited capacity for hypocrisy.
      - woleium 3y ago
        Wilhoit's law This quotation is often incorrectly attributed to Francis M. Wilhoit: Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.

canadianwriter 3y ago

If they told the parents they were photoshopped instead of AI made, would that have changed anything? Curious if we change the language used if that changes how people think of it...

golol 3y ago

> People viewing explicit images of you without your consent — whether those images are real or fake — is a form of sexual violence. What if you imagine it? What if you describe it to your friend? What if you sketch it on your tablet and then delete it?

wmf 3y ago
That's thotcrime.
krastanov 3y ago
I am sure there is a line that is difficult to draw between what is ok and what is not, but can we not at least agree that there are two very different extremes easily separated by any such line: - most folks probably will agree that imagining sexual content with your teacher and keeping it to yourself is fine - most folks probably will also agree that making photorealistic fake porn of your teacher and spreading it around is akin to defamation or sexual harassment Let's take care of the extremes, then we can worry about the difficult middle.
- Fire-Dragon-DoL 3y ago
  What about talking with somebody else about wanting to have sex with the teacher, even the whole class? I'm asking on purpose to figure out where the line is
  - krastanov 3y ago
    I do not know. However, we can take care of 90% of the problems in this context without having an answer to your question, because most cases are far from the dividing line.
- golol 3y ago
  Yea but the spreading around is the important part. Should just creating the content be illegal? Right now it kinda is but I don't find that to be quite consistent.
3y ago