3 ms·
On the other hand, if said deep fake was never publicly revealed, and is only utilized by the person who made it (and not distributed), then is there harm done?
by chii 3y ago
On the other hand, if said deep fake was never publicly revealed, and is only utilized by the person who made it (and not distributed), then is there harm done? The deep fake subject is completely ignorant of it in this scenario.
In other words, is the harm not in the production, but the wide distribution of the material, and the harm is in the reputation of the subject (even if explicitly labeled fake), and not in the actual contents?
And so this begs the question - if an AI could deep fake something on demand, without ever distributing it except to the requester, then is there any harm done?
- Cthulhu_ 3y agoWell, consider revenge porn. A couple shares images or makes videos of themselves, never publicly revealed, only utilized by the person / people who made it, no harm done right? But then the relationship breaks up and one of the partners publishes the footage. Or their account or device get compromised and the material goes public. There's a series of new laws with regards to revenge porn, and deepfake porn will likely fall under that category. It's not about whether it stays private, it's the risk of it going public. I mean this issue isn't anything new either, it's pretty straightforward and common to edit a celebrity's face onto a nude model.
- __loam 3y agoDeepfake porn is already illegal in some jurisdictions afaik.
- shinycode 3y agoSo you say deepfake is a powerful tool and the responsibility bears with who is using the tool. Like guns are powerful tools but some guns are military grade and illegal if possessed by the public because of their power of destruction. It’s not about the tool per se but the possible damage that classify the gun, even if I’m a responsible being and will never misuse such tools, out of safety I’m not allowed to own several classes of guns.