5 ms·

For sure but for the otherwise innocent creator on an airgapped pc there is nothing to worry about. Who would ever know? I do think the other examples you gave

For sure but for the otherwise innocent creator on an airgapped pc there is nothing to worry about. Who would ever know? I do think the other examples you gave have one significant and fundamental difference - no one would mistake those things as being real. The problem with deepfakes is these have a similar social impact and capcity for harm as real nudes do, only there is no element of consent. You could ruin someones life quite easily with deep fakes, but not with your lewd poetry or sketches. So it seems reasonable to me to ban these with a blanket ban. I would prefer we lived in a world where that wasnt neccesary, but for every technology you must imagine the most sinister and exploitative application and realise that someone will try that and worse. How do you even begin to combat deepfakes and the social problems they bring? how many bodies are considered acceptable until we get it right? Possibly, its best to over reach a little then relax the grip rather than to take it slow, given what is on the line for some.

sungho_ 3y ago
I think the point is about the images which will never be shared No one wonders why they shouldn't spread fake nude photos of real people
- Grimblewald 3y ago
  and again, if they will never be shared, there is not much to worry about. We do need tools to persecute people who failed on the 'never be shared' front. Be it theft or otherwise, if others get the material from them, it doesn't matter, it should be treated as guilty of producing with intent to distribute. This is for two reasons, the first being this way people cannot hide behind the 'oopsie' defense.Second, if you made compromising material of others without consent, your duty of care is through the roof. If it leaks, you are at fault, no matter how hard you tried to prevent it. You never had to make that material. There was no reason to make it other than a selfish self-centered personal pursuits of a hedonistic nature, now if its victimless I don't care personally but the moment your selfish self-centered behavior hurts others, you are a danger to society.
  - sungho_ 2y ago
    Don't you think that's impractical? All attempts to stop people from using the Internet to do things on their own have failed. If the creation of such images is considered a crime in itself, then it will be obscured. Therefore, treating dissemination as a crime is not only logical, but also practical. And when it comes to accidental leaks, even if the person who created the image didn't pay attention, the leak happens by somebody anyway. I think it would be more practical and lead a better result to punish those responsible for the leak itself
wakawaka28 3y ago
>You could ruin someones life quite easily with deep fakes, but not with your lewd poetry or sketches. So it seems reasonable to me to ban these with a blanket ban. A ban won't stop bad people from making them anyway. On the other hand, proliferation of deepfakes would make the existence of certain real or fake photos insignificant, as everyone would accept that anyone could make them easily.

sungho_ 3y ago

I think the point is about the images which will never be shared No one wonders why they shouldn't spread fake nude photos of real people

Grimblewald 3y ago
and again, if they will never be shared, there is not much to worry about. We do need tools to persecute people who failed on the 'never be shared' front. Be it theft or otherwise, if others get the material from them, it doesn't matter, it should be treated as guilty of producing with intent to distribute. This is for two reasons, the first being this way people cannot hide behind the 'oopsie' defense.Second, if you made compromising material of others without consent, your duty of care is through the roof. If it leaks, you are at fault, no matter how hard you tried to prevent it. You never had to make that material. There was no reason to make it other than a selfish self-centered personal pursuits of a hedonistic nature, now if its victimless I don't care personally but the moment your selfish self-centered behavior hurts others, you are a danger to society.
- sungho_ 2y ago
  Don't you think that's impractical? All attempts to stop people from using the Internet to do things on their own have failed. If the creation of such images is considered a crime in itself, then it will be obscured. Therefore, treating dissemination as a crime is not only logical, but also practical. And when it comes to accidental leaks, even if the person who created the image didn't pay attention, the leak happens by somebody anyway. I think it would be more practical and lead a better result to punish those responsible for the leak itself

wakawaka28 3y ago

>You could ruin someones life quite easily with deep fakes, but not with your lewd poetry or sketches. So it seems reasonable to me to ban these with a blanket ban. A ban won't stop bad people from making them anyway. On the other hand, proliferation of deepfakes would make the existence of certain real or fake photos insignificant, as everyone would accept that anyone could make them easily.