4 ms·

I'm much more comfortable with the idea of AI watermarking images it creates instead of refusing to create images because of "safety", which in practice more of

I'm much more comfortable with the idea of AI watermarking images it creates instead of refusing to create images because of "safety", which in practice more often means not wanting to offend anyone. Imagine if word processors like Google Docs refused to write things you wanted to write because of mature themes. The important thing, in my opinion, is to make it a lot more difficult to pass off AI generated content as being authentic and to make provenance traceable if you were to do something like create revenge porn with AI, but not to make AI refuse to create explicit material at all.

AlecSchueler 3y ago
It being authentic or not isn't actually important in a lot of cases though. Consider someone like Mia Janin, who recently took her own life after been harassed using deepfakes. Everyone understood that the images weren't "authentic" but their power to cause distress was very real.
- theultdev 3y ago
  Is there a difference between being harassed with deepfakes vs fakes? Photoshop has the power to cause distress too when used maliciously. You go after the aggressors, not the tool used for aggression.
  - AlecSchueler 3y ago
    Ease of use and accessibility. Think of how we control access to guns even though a baseball bat could also be used to kill or maim someone. I agree that we should legislate against the aggressors, that's why I'm pointing out the limitations of technical solutions like watermarks. We need extensions to things like revenge pornography laws, if we're talking about legislation, and I don't see any harm in outlawing services that automate the creation of deepfakes. Of course the only "solution" is that we would universally behind to teach young boys that they are not entitled to women's bodies or their sexuality, but so many grown men apparently disagree that I can't see it happening quickly enough.
    - spangry 3y ago
      I'm one of the grown men who disagree. I don't think treating half the population as pre-criminals, when in reality it's an extremely tiny minority who act in this way, is a particularly good solution. If we were to apply this kind of "solution" to all undesirable behaviours exhibited by deviant minorities of both men and women I doubt there'd be any time for any actual K-12 formal education. It's a nice applause line though.
      - AlecSchueler 3y ago
        So no to technical solutions, no to legislative solutions and no to education. What do you suggest? Edit: you disagree that men aren't entitled to women's sexuality? Edit: I mis-interpreted what was being disagree with.
        kj99 3y ago
        Presumably enforcement of existing laws.
        AlecSchueler 3y ago
        Which laws do you mean and where do they apply? This article talks a bit about the lack of legal power to fight against deepfakes: https://mcolaw.com/theres-not-much-we-can-legally-do-about-deepfake-porn-yet-refinery29/ https://mcolaw.com/theres-not-much-we-can-legally-do-about-d...
        kj99 3y ago
        Good information. Then the solution would be to improve harassment legislation rather than limiting the availability of tools. Just as assault is illegal but we don’t require all hammers to be made out of foam.
        AlecSchueler 3y ago
        Indeed.
- postalrat 3y ago
  The number of people who committed suicide after being harassed with memes or emoji must be higher than those harassed with deep fakes. Too bad nobody is interested enough in banning emoji to do a study.
  - AlecSchueler 3y ago
    Can you link to an article where emojis have been pivotal in an harassment case leading to suicide? They've been around for 30 years, deepfakes as they are today have been around for less than a year. I'm not sure absolute numbers are the best thing to look at either way.
    - postalrat 3y ago
      The emoji and meme industry has been hiding these stats for years. Facebook, X, TikTok, Apple, etc have the data you want but they won't give it to you.
  - spangry 3y ago
    Why stop there? I think we'd all agree that "mean words", either written or spoken, have immense power to "cause distress" and have driven many a person to suicide. We should ban those.
    - AlecSchueler 3y ago
      We do. Incitement to violence or "true threats" for example already fall outside of 1st amendment protections. I personally see deepfakes created or disseminated for harassment purposes as an act of violence.
      - spangry 3y ago
        I'm neither referring to "true threats" nor making any kind of argument about the US constitution, so I'm unsure why you're bringing these up. I thought it would have been pretty clear that in the context of driving people to suicide, I was suggesting banning "insulting words". Hope that clarifies things for you.

AlecSchueler 3y ago

It being authentic or not isn't actually important in a lot of cases though. Consider someone like Mia Janin, who recently took her own life after been harassed using deepfakes. Everyone understood that the images weren't "authentic" but their power to cause distress was very real.

theultdev 3y ago
Is there a difference between being harassed with deepfakes vs fakes? Photoshop has the power to cause distress too when used maliciously. You go after the aggressors, not the tool used for aggression.
- AlecSchueler 3y ago
  Ease of use and accessibility. Think of how we control access to guns even though a baseball bat could also be used to kill or maim someone. I agree that we should legislate against the aggressors, that's why I'm pointing out the limitations of technical solutions like watermarks. We need extensions to things like revenge pornography laws, if we're talking about legislation, and I don't see any harm in outlawing services that automate the creation of deepfakes. Of course the only "solution" is that we would universally behind to teach young boys that they are not entitled to women's bodies or their sexuality, but so many grown men apparently disagree that I can't see it happening quickly enough.
  - spangry 3y ago
    I'm one of the grown men who disagree. I don't think treating half the population as pre-criminals, when in reality it's an extremely tiny minority who act in this way, is a particularly good solution. If we were to apply this kind of "solution" to all undesirable behaviours exhibited by deviant minorities of both men and women I doubt there'd be any time for any actual K-12 formal education. It's a nice applause line though.
    - AlecSchueler 3y ago
      So no to technical solutions, no to legislative solutions and no to education. What do you suggest? Edit: you disagree that men aren't entitled to women's sexuality? Edit: I mis-interpreted what was being disagree with.
      - kj99 3y ago
        Presumably enforcement of existing laws.
        AlecSchueler 3y ago
        Which laws do you mean and where do they apply? This article talks a bit about the lack of legal power to fight against deepfakes: https://mcolaw.com/theres-not-much-we-can-legally-do-about-deepfake-porn-yet-refinery29/ https://mcolaw.com/theres-not-much-we-can-legally-do-about-d...
        kj99 3y ago
        Good information. Then the solution would be to improve harassment legislation rather than limiting the availability of tools. Just as assault is illegal but we don’t require all hammers to be made out of foam.
        AlecSchueler 3y ago
        Indeed.
postalrat 3y ago
The number of people who committed suicide after being harassed with memes or emoji must be higher than those harassed with deep fakes. Too bad nobody is interested enough in banning emoji to do a study.
- AlecSchueler 3y ago
  Can you link to an article where emojis have been pivotal in an harassment case leading to suicide? They've been around for 30 years, deepfakes as they are today have been around for less than a year. I'm not sure absolute numbers are the best thing to look at either way.
  - postalrat 3y ago
    The emoji and meme industry has been hiding these stats for years. Facebook, X, TikTok, Apple, etc have the data you want but they won't give it to you.
- spangry 3y ago
  Why stop there? I think we'd all agree that "mean words", either written or spoken, have immense power to "cause distress" and have driven many a person to suicide. We should ban those.
  - AlecSchueler 3y ago
    We do. Incitement to violence or "true threats" for example already fall outside of 1st amendment protections. I personally see deepfakes created or disseminated for harassment purposes as an act of violence.
    - spangry 3y ago
      I'm neither referring to "true threats" nor making any kind of argument about the US constitution, so I'm unsure why you're bringing these up. I thought it would have been pretty clear that in the context of driving people to suicide, I was suggesting banning "insulting words". Hope that clarifies things for you.