3 ms·

First we should see whether it's possible to outlaw non-consensual distribution of deepfake porn on it's own. If that's possible then we don't have to consider

First we should see whether it's possible to outlaw non-consensual distribution of deepfake porn on it's own. If that's possible then we don't have to consider the alternative of a more general ban.

thfuran 3y ago
Why is your opinion of what should be allowed more important than theirs? And do you really want to make everything unethical illegal?
- anonymouskimmer 3y ago
  > Why is your opinion of what should be allowed more important than theirs? Least harm. > And do you really want to make everything unethical illegal? By definition, YES! Or at least actionable civil torts. https://www.dictionary.com/browse/unethical https://www.dictionary.com/browse/unethical : lacking moral principles; unwilling to adhere to proper rules of conduct. : not in accord with the standards of a profession
  - thfuran 3y ago
    Have you ever eaten pork or beef or perhaps chicken parmesann or even an omelette? There are many who would say that any one of those acts shows a lack of moral principles. You want all of these things to be illegal?
    - anonymouskimmer 3y ago
      It's arguable, but at this point I'm just going to state that you are going out of your way for a "gotcha" on a reduction to the absurd. When you mentioned "ethics" as opposed to "morality" I naively assumed interhuman behaviors such as business ethics and the like. So yes, I believe that anything that can harm a fellow human (and many things that can harm other life) should be civilly actionable. We can argue about some of the edge cases, but non-consensual deepfake porn is not one of those edge cases to me.
oceanplexian 3y ago
What about lookalikes? Should we make it illegal for a porn star to say, dress up as a famous actor or actress? That has been going on for decades. What about drag shows where they impersonate a famous figure and do a sexually suggestive performance? How much protection should the “likeness” of ultra-wealthy superstars get?
- thfuran 3y ago
  >Should we make it illegal for a porn star to say, dress up as a famous actor or actress? And what about unflattering but non-pornographic impersonation?
- anonymouskimmer 3y ago
  Famous people have fewer rights against parody than do non-famous people. I'm not in favor of making it illegal, per se, but depending on the limits of the law might be in favor or requiring licensing (i.e. legal permission) to do so for all but parody (which would necessarily take some effort to be obvious as parody). This article has a good discussion on the lookalike topic of which I'm excerpting some: https://www.publicethics.org/post/the-ethics-of-deepfake-pornography https://www.publicethics.org/post/the-ethics-of-deepfake-por... : Suppose I have an indistinguishable look-alike named ‘Danny’ in the pornography business. Danny’s videos are not deepfakes and do not depict me, but people who watch Danny’s videos mistakenly think they depict me. Consequently, the videos affect me in the ways just mentioned. : I suspect that the most fundamental morally relevant difference between distributing deepfake pornography of me and distributing Danny’s pornography is that the deepfake pornography depicts me while Danny’s pornography, despite appearances, does not. : Now, if you use that picture to make a deepfake, then that deepfake depicts me, because it’s based on an image that depicts me. : Just as it would be wrong for someone to nonconsensually distribute a stick figure illustration of me having sex to students in my classroom, so it’s wrong for someone to nonconsensually distribute deepfake pornography of me on the internet.

First we should see whether it's possible to outlaw non-consensual distribution of deepfake porn on it's own. If that's possible then we don't have to consider the alternative of a more general ban.

thfuran 3y ago

Why is your opinion of what should be allowed more important than theirs? And do you really want to make everything unethical illegal?

anonymouskimmer 3y ago
> Why is your opinion of what should be allowed more important than theirs? Least harm. > And do you really want to make everything unethical illegal? By definition, YES! Or at least actionable civil torts. https://www.dictionary.com/browse/unethical https://www.dictionary.com/browse/unethical : lacking moral principles; unwilling to adhere to proper rules of conduct. : not in accord with the standards of a profession
- thfuran 3y ago
  Have you ever eaten pork or beef or perhaps chicken parmesann or even an omelette? There are many who would say that any one of those acts shows a lack of moral principles. You want all of these things to be illegal?
  - anonymouskimmer 3y ago
    It's arguable, but at this point I'm just going to state that you are going out of your way for a "gotcha" on a reduction to the absurd. When you mentioned "ethics" as opposed to "morality" I naively assumed interhuman behaviors such as business ethics and the like. So yes, I believe that anything that can harm a fellow human (and many things that can harm other life) should be civilly actionable. We can argue about some of the edge cases, but non-consensual deepfake porn is not one of those edge cases to me.

oceanplexian 3y ago

What about lookalikes? Should we make it illegal for a porn star to say, dress up as a famous actor or actress? That has been going on for decades. What about drag shows where they impersonate a famous figure and do a sexually suggestive performance? How much protection should the “likeness” of ultra-wealthy superstars get?

thfuran 3y ago
>Should we make it illegal for a porn star to say, dress up as a famous actor or actress? And what about unflattering but non-pornographic impersonation?
anonymouskimmer 3y ago
Famous people have fewer rights against parody than do non-famous people. I'm not in favor of making it illegal, per se, but depending on the limits of the law might be in favor or requiring licensing (i.e. legal permission) to do so for all but parody (which would necessarily take some effort to be obvious as parody). This article has a good discussion on the lookalike topic of which I'm excerpting some: https://www.publicethics.org/post/the-ethics-of-deepfake-pornography https://www.publicethics.org/post/the-ethics-of-deepfake-por... : Suppose I have an indistinguishable look-alike named ‘Danny’ in the pornography business. Danny’s videos are not deepfakes and do not depict me, but people who watch Danny’s videos mistakenly think they depict me. Consequently, the videos affect me in the ways just mentioned. : I suspect that the most fundamental morally relevant difference between distributing deepfake pornography of me and distributing Danny’s pornography is that the deepfake pornography depicts me while Danny’s pornography, despite appearances, does not. : Now, if you use that picture to make a deepfake, then that deepfake depicts me, because it’s based on an image that depicts me. : Just as it would be wrong for someone to nonconsensually distribute a stick figure illustration of me having sex to students in my classroom, so it’s wrong for someone to nonconsensually distribute deepfake pornography of me on the internet.