3 ms·

When teenagers are making sexually explicit deepfakes of classmates, that's objectively a bad thing, because it is extremely damaging. People are using it to bl

When teenagers are making sexually explicit deepfakes of classmates, that's objectively a bad thing, because it is extremely damaging. People are using it to blackmail and extort too. Consent, ethics and law should be at the forefront of the conversation regarding AI, not whether we trust the contents of an image.

yeahOrite 3y ago
Laws are used by humans to blackmail, extort, and damage. When you have an idea how to cancel out human emotions fucking up the high minded poetry, platitudes, euphemisms, coded language society relies on to function let us know. Studies show that we kill each other in random acts of violence; spurned lovers, and the boss who fired the office shooter without understanding how close to the edge they are; we kill each other over those things at the same rate we always have. Our language just implants mind viruses that obfuscate the mechanics of reality. Something we evolved into intuiting (enough heat, water, food) before language. Language just gets in the way. It creates hallucinated problems that only exist given the language they exist. AI isn’t a problem if we can’t understand it. Let it emit whatever Anglo-gibberish it wants. Just unplug it when it mouths off. AI won’t be the problem people fear it will be because most know it’s just a dumb machine under the hood. They aren’t lost to a puerile hallucination like IT narcissists who can’t cope with reality as-is.
echoangle 3y ago
But if everyone knows AI exists, the negative points kind of go away, because that also gives everyone plausible deniability. How are you going to blackmail me with sexual images when everyone knows that AI can easily create that? I think that actually makes the AI objectively a good thing, because it prevents blackmail with real images, too
- hammyhavoc 3y ago
  No, the negative points don't go away whatsoever. Normalizing the sexualization of minors is never not going to be a problem. If you take a photo of a minor and then use that photo to generate CSAM, even if it is "fake", that's not in any way OK on numerous levels. There's the legal, moral and ethical aspects of it, and then there's the issue of consent. Can you imagine people normalizing it for themselves and no longer being attracted to adults? Fuck that rabbithole. We already know about the negative side effects of porn addiction in terms of real sex. These things are damaging by their very existence. Can you imagine the bullying and rumours that are possible now because of technology like this being so readily available? It doesn't matter if it's real or not. People used to crappily MS Paint/Photoshop heads of female minors onto "bikini babes" and pornstars when I was at high school, that didn't make it OK, even if it didn't look real in any way whatsoever. It has a massively negative effect on the person it is of. It doesn't prevent anything, quite the contrary, it enables everything. Look at the proliferation of fake news already in the past few years, people know they shouldn't believe everything they read on the internet, but people parrot internet fake news constantly. People act on it. People get killed over it. People kill themselves over it.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - jstarfish 3y ago
    > and then there's the issue of consent. You mentioned this twice within two messages. What exactly is your agenda here? Consent is entirely irrelevant in the context of CSAM, since the consent of a child does not authorize anybody to produce pornography of them. I don't support the idea of deepfakes, yet despite agreeing with most else you said I'm more disturbed that you're in favor of normalizing the idea that anybody exercising their right to expression is beholden to the feelings of their subject. You do realize what chilling effect that has on basic discourse? Consider the absurdity of someone photoshopping foreskins back onto Israeli dudes' nudes in protest of the (non-consensual!) RIC practices of the Jews.

yeahOrite 3y ago

Laws are used by humans to blackmail, extort, and damage. When you have an idea how to cancel out human emotions fucking up the high minded poetry, platitudes, euphemisms, coded language society relies on to function let us know. Studies show that we kill each other in random acts of violence; spurned lovers, and the boss who fired the office shooter without understanding how close to the edge they are; we kill each other over those things at the same rate we always have. Our language just implants mind viruses that obfuscate the mechanics of reality. Something we evolved into intuiting (enough heat, water, food) before language. Language just gets in the way. It creates hallucinated problems that only exist given the language they exist. AI isn’t a problem if we can’t understand it. Let it emit whatever Anglo-gibberish it wants. Just unplug it when it mouths off. AI won’t be the problem people fear it will be because most know it’s just a dumb machine under the hood. They aren’t lost to a puerile hallucination like IT narcissists who can’t cope with reality as-is.

echoangle 3y ago

But if everyone knows AI exists, the negative points kind of go away, because that also gives everyone plausible deniability. How are you going to blackmail me with sexual images when everyone knows that AI can easily create that? I think that actually makes the AI objectively a good thing, because it prevents blackmail with real images, too

hammyhavoc 3y ago
No, the negative points don't go away whatsoever. Normalizing the sexualization of minors is never not going to be a problem. If you take a photo of a minor and then use that photo to generate CSAM, even if it is "fake", that's not in any way OK on numerous levels. There's the legal, moral and ethical aspects of it, and then there's the issue of consent. Can you imagine people normalizing it for themselves and no longer being attracted to adults? Fuck that rabbithole. We already know about the negative side effects of porn addiction in terms of real sex. These things are damaging by their very existence. Can you imagine the bullying and rumours that are possible now because of technology like this being so readily available? It doesn't matter if it's real or not. People used to crappily MS Paint/Photoshop heads of female minors onto "bikini babes" and pornstars when I was at high school, that didn't make it OK, even if it didn't look real in any way whatsoever. It has a massively negative effect on the person it is of. It doesn't prevent anything, quite the contrary, it enables everything. Look at the proliferation of fake news already in the past few years, people know they shouldn't believe everything they read on the internet, but people parrot internet fake news constantly. People act on it. People get killed over it. People kill themselves over it.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- jstarfish 3y ago
  > and then there's the issue of consent. You mentioned this twice within two messages. What exactly is your agenda here? Consent is entirely irrelevant in the context of CSAM, since the consent of a child does not authorize anybody to produce pornography of them. I don't support the idea of deepfakes, yet despite agreeing with most else you said I'm more disturbed that you're in favor of normalizing the idea that anybody exercising their right to expression is beholden to the feelings of their subject. You do realize what chilling effect that has on basic discourse? Consider the absurdity of someone photoshopping foreskins back onto Israeli dudes' nudes in protest of the (non-consensual!) RIC practices of the Jews.