6 ms·

> what if AI was used to imitate a person saying something blasphemeous? > My country is already has blasphemy lynching mobs in your case the problem is not A

by kmlx 2y ago

> what if AI was used to imitate a person saying something blasphemeous? > My country is already has blasphemy lynching mobs in your case the problem is not AI, it’s your country.

latexr 2y ago
The comment didn’t say the problem was AI, it said they feared its consequences, which is a perfectly valid concern. It’s like if someone said “I’m scared of someone bringing a semi-automatic weapon to my school and doing a mass shooting. My country has lax laws about guns and their proper use”. And then you said “in your case the problem is not guns, it’s your country”. I mean, it’s technically true, but also unhelpful. Such ingrained laws are hard to change and you can be placed in danger for even trying. Before someone decries the gun example as not being comparable, it is possible to live in a country with a monumental number of guns and not have mass murdering every day. It’s called Switzerland. But let’s please stick to the subject of AI, which is what the thread is about. The gun example is the first analogy which came to mind, and analogies are never perfect, so it’s unproductive to nitpick the example. I don’t mean to shift the conversation from one contentious topic to another.
- underdeserver 2y ago
  Switzerland allows you to own a gun, but (generally) not to bear it. Huge difference.
  - bryanrasmussen 2y ago
    America also has laws against taking guns into theaters and indiscriminately shooting people, once you have easy access to guns the gun becomes a potential solution to problems. Maybe Switzerland just has less problems where that potential solution appeals to people.
    - input_sh 2y ago
      I'd say that the key difference is that Switzerland has compulsory military service in which you're taught how to operate a weapon properly. Therefore, everyone that has one has gone through months of training. Vs the US, where there are loopholes that you can use to avoid even a basic background check, and then use it for the very first time to shoot someone.
      - thfuran 2y ago
        Training seems likely to cut down on accidental shootings, but not so much on the deliberate ones.
        underdeserver 2y ago
        I disagree. First of all, people with issues are more likely to be found out in boot camp. Second, you learn a certain respect for the firearm and are expected to observe strict safety rules when handling it. That gives you a kind of psychological flinch when you consider doing anything out of the norm with it.
        ambicapter 2y ago
        It seems like tons of toddler are accidentally firing guns as well in America, so training probably won't help there.
        thfuran 2y ago
        Training people to lock up their damn guns would.
      - tharkun__ 2y ago
        That doesn't seem to make sense. All that would do is to make sure that a nut job knows how to properly shoot the gun. Basically what you are saying is "a Swiss wouldn't have missed Trump". The difference might be in what guns mean to Swiss people vs. the US. A gun in the US has this "if the government becomes destructive of these ends we can start shooting" connotation. A gun is there for self defense. Someone doesn't get off your law, you use your gun. In Switzerland the gun and the compulsory military service you mention is there for the people to protect their country and fellow countrymen. You are trained in defending your neighbor, who just stepped on your lawn against outside aggressors.
- pjc50 2y ago
  > It’s like if someone said “I’m scared of someone bringing a semi-automatic weapon to my school and doing a mass shooting. My country has lax laws about guns and their proper use”. And then you said “in your case the problem is not guns, it’s your country”. The US has both problems: widespread availability of weapons and a high level of freedom to incite violence through spreading lies about groups. Which is why it sees much more of these incidents than countries which have similar levels of gun ownership. The non-gun version of the problem is mass stabbings, which are less lethal.
7bit 2y ago
That's a little too easy no? AI being used to imitate people definitely is a problem that needs to be addressed, and already is. Discarding that because there is a bigger issue is ignorant. Both can exist as a problem at the same time.
ryzvonusef 2y ago
Your country might not have lynching mobs, but you can't deny there are certain taboo topics in your society also, certain slurs and other opinions which would take you ages to clense and even then never fully. If an AI fake-porn of some ordinary person involving a minor was unleashed, think of the utter shame and horror they would be treated by people for the rest of their lives, even if it were proven false. No one would believe them, work with them, hire them, rent them, they would wish they had been lynched instead of the life they live.
- roenxi 2y ago
  But mob formation and mass social shaming on little evidence already happens without AI and it isn't clear why AI would make it worse. If it gets so easy to create fake videos that'll just muddy the waters and people would trust rumour less, not form mobs more. It happens once, then some wag creates videos of all the mob leaders blaspheming or whatever. Undermines the idea that the videos are the root cause.
  - ryzvonusef 2y ago
    You are giving too much credence to the analytical capabilites to a lynch mob, and you are underestimating how much AI lowers the barrier for creating realistic 'proof' for incitement. Also there are no mob 'leaders'. These are everyday folks, these are you and me and my neighbours. A student pissed at a teacher could create a fake AI video of his teacher at night, and wake up to no pesky teacher and feel no remorse over what happened while he slept. The student was not a mob leader, just some dumbass who was angry at their teacher for giving bad grades, and had access to simple AI tools (soon available online for a trivial fee, if not free). ____ Be honest, are you 100% sure of the status of that facebook account you deleted in 2018? Zuck never deleted it, that content is still there to be mined and abused. Also not that hard to just log in to the damn thing and post something spicy. I don't remember if old posts can be edited in FB, cause that would allow the person to really gild the lily.
  - benterix 2y ago
    > people would trust rumour less, not form mobs more I believe you are right. When the first unbelievable clips appeared on Facebook (where the most gullible people are), you could see the old ladies cheering "oh how wonderful! where did you film that?" Now in the comments section you will mostly see people saying "sheesh, stop polluting my feed with these fake AI-generated spam". Don't get me wrong, many people still fall for them, but the tendency seems clear - after all, we managed to survive because of learning.
pjc50 2y ago
The US equivalent is much less labour intensive than a lynch mob: it's mass shooters radicalized by things they've read on the internet. Or https://www.npr.org/2024/09/19/nx-s1-5114047/springfield-ohio-haitian-migrants-trump-safety-concerns https://www.npr.org/2024/09/19/nx-s1-5114047/springfield-ohi... , where repeating racial libel causes a public safety problem. While this kind of incitement in no way requires AI, it's certainly something that's easier to do when you can fake evidence. See also https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c5y87l6rx5wo https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c5y87l6rx5wo
- fragmede 2y ago
  https://apnews.com/article/ai-maryland-principal-voice-recording-663d5bc0714a3af221392cc6f1af985e https://apnews.com/article/ai-maryland-principal-voice-recor... In the US, freedom of speech means the government won't stifle you, but the court of public opinion will crucify you for saying the wrong thing. In the linked case, a school principal was framed for being a racist, a fire able offense. Better than being killed by religious extremists, I suppose, but still not great. Thankfully in this case they were able to find the perpetrator who faked evidence, but we have a problem.
- psychlops 2y ago
  The internet isn't always the bogeyman, the last assassin was radicalized by mass media.
- jokethrowaway 2y ago
  Yes, but after the invention of radio and television we already enabled mass indoctrination and mass brainwashing. The internet is more refined but the same principle. The solution is not to ban technology (it's impossible), but to create a more decentralised society where the majority of voters, which is easily brainwashed, doesn't get to dictate the life of the minority. We need to destroy and dismantle all the gigantic entities that ruin our life for the advantage of the few, whether they are the government or corporations ruled by billionaires controlling the government. We also need to create a better society with less mental illness, where people are not depressed by how unfair life is that they go on and kill kids in school - but I believe if we reduce large societal inequality this will sort itself out over time. Parents in my circle are already banning social medias for their kids until they're adults - so over time we'll evolve to get better at ignoring all the crap we get exposed to.
Ygg2 2y ago
The problem is AI. What if you post video of a politician eating babies, and that causes some nutjob to kill that politician? Sure, distrust everything digital, but what if only evidence of someone doing something wrong is digital?
- charlieyu1 2y ago
  People copied and pasted faces of celebrities on another photo since 1990s. Nothing significant happened.
  - ryzvonusef 2y ago
    problem is not celebrities, problem is general every day people. With celeberaties, atleast they are famous enough that the idea of fakes exist... but you are Johnny nobody, that's not a fake, you just got caught and don't want to admit you said/did it! The court of public opinion is much smaller and personal, and 'evidence' is much more realistic and detailed.
    - Nathanba 2y ago
      general every day people will have to figure out that photoshop exists and that it contains AI now that can invent pictures from scratch. It should be easy to figure out, just explain that it can paint 100% realistically like a camera. The real issue is how people will start using this as a defense for criminal acts. "it wasn't me, all the camera footage is AI generated"
- jokethrowaway 2y ago
  Becoming famous always had its risks because of mentally ill people targeting you. Nothing new. The trick is being rich without being famous!
- tomjen3 2y ago
  What if someone printed yellow papers blaming Spain for a ship accident so the us would go to war with them?
flembat 2y ago
An individual is not responsible for the culture or government in the country they live in. In the UK a government was just elected with a historical absolute majority by only ten million people, and now first time offenders are being sent to prison for making stupid offensive statements online.
- switch007 2y ago
  Are you referring to this case? > In a now deleted post on her X account, Mrs Connolly, from Northampton, wrote: “Mass deportation now, set fire to all the f*** hotels full of the bastards for all I care… If that makes me racist, so be it. > The court heard Kay copied, pasted and uploaded Mrs Connolly’s post at 12.27pm on Wednesday from a BBC News report and added the hashtags #standwithlucyconnolly #lucyconnolly #f**northamptonshirepolice #conservative #FaragesRiots #RiotsUK and #Northampton. > As well as a post which urged people to “mask up” during a protest targeting an immigration law firm, Kay tweeted to his 127 followers at 2.34am: “That’s 100% the plan, plus gloves. No car either so no number plate to trace and a change of clothes ready nearby.” https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/northampton-bbc-news-southport-defence https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/northampton-bbc-...
  - flembat 2y ago
    Free speech, should not just be for people we agree with. Although I agree conspiracy to commit a crime is something else. My point was that AI faked content could certainly get you locked up in the UK.
berniedurfee 2y ago
What country is immune to this? As far as I can tell the collective conscious of every country is swayed by propaganda. A written headline is enough to incite rage in any country much less a voice or video indistinguishable from the real thing. Folks in “developed’ countries have their lives destroyed or ended all the time based on rumors of something said or done.
- bufferoverflow 2y ago
  Any country that doesn't have executions by mobs. Used to be most nordic countries. Till they changed their immigration policies.
  - JoeAltmaier 2y ago
    OR any number of non-racist forces at work e.g. the internet, movies and social norms changing everywhere.
    - bufferoverflow 2y ago
      Those are the mobs. Your average "non-racist" force is just racist to some other race.
bitnasty 2y ago
That may be true, but it doesn’t unkill the victims.

by kmlx 2y ago

> what if AI was used to imitate a person saying something blasphemeous? > My country is already has blasphemy lynching mobs in your case the problem is not AI, it’s your country.

latexr 2y ago

The comment didn’t say the problem was AI, it said they feared its consequences, which is a perfectly valid concern. It’s like if someone said “I’m scared of someone bringing a semi-automatic weapon to my school and doing a mass shooting. My country has lax laws about guns and their proper use”. And then you said “in your case the problem is not guns, it’s your country”. I mean, it’s technically true, but also unhelpful. Such ingrained laws are hard to change and you can be placed in danger for even trying. Before someone decries the gun example as not being comparable, it is possible to live in a country with a monumental number of guns and not have mass murdering every day. It’s called Switzerland. But let’s please stick to the subject of AI, which is what the thread is about. The gun example is the first analogy which came to mind, and analogies are never perfect, so it’s unproductive to nitpick the example. I don’t mean to shift the conversation from one contentious topic to another.

underdeserver 2y ago
Switzerland allows you to own a gun, but (generally) not to bear it. Huge difference.
- bryanrasmussen 2y ago
  America also has laws against taking guns into theaters and indiscriminately shooting people, once you have easy access to guns the gun becomes a potential solution to problems. Maybe Switzerland just has less problems where that potential solution appeals to people.
  - input_sh 2y ago
    I'd say that the key difference is that Switzerland has compulsory military service in which you're taught how to operate a weapon properly. Therefore, everyone that has one has gone through months of training. Vs the US, where there are loopholes that you can use to avoid even a basic background check, and then use it for the very first time to shoot someone.
    - thfuran 2y ago
      Training seems likely to cut down on accidental shootings, but not so much on the deliberate ones.
      - underdeserver 2y ago
        I disagree. First of all, people with issues are more likely to be found out in boot camp. Second, you learn a certain respect for the firearm and are expected to observe strict safety rules when handling it. That gives you a kind of psychological flinch when you consider doing anything out of the norm with it.
      - ambicapter 2y ago
        It seems like tons of toddler are accidentally firing guns as well in America, so training probably won't help there.
        thfuran 2y ago
        Training people to lock up their damn guns would.
    - tharkun__ 2y ago
      That doesn't seem to make sense. All that would do is to make sure that a nut job knows how to properly shoot the gun. Basically what you are saying is "a Swiss wouldn't have missed Trump". The difference might be in what guns mean to Swiss people vs. the US. A gun in the US has this "if the government becomes destructive of these ends we can start shooting" connotation. A gun is there for self defense. Someone doesn't get off your law, you use your gun. In Switzerland the gun and the compulsory military service you mention is there for the people to protect their country and fellow countrymen. You are trained in defending your neighbor, who just stepped on your lawn against outside aggressors.
pjc50 2y ago
> It’s like if someone said “I’m scared of someone bringing a semi-automatic weapon to my school and doing a mass shooting. My country has lax laws about guns and their proper use”. And then you said “in your case the problem is not guns, it’s your country”. The US has both problems: widespread availability of weapons and a high level of freedom to incite violence through spreading lies about groups. Which is why it sees much more of these incidents than countries which have similar levels of gun ownership. The non-gun version of the problem is mass stabbings, which are less lethal.

7bit 2y ago

That's a little too easy no? AI being used to imitate people definitely is a problem that needs to be addressed, and already is. Discarding that because there is a bigger issue is ignorant. Both can exist as a problem at the same time.

ryzvonusef 2y ago

Your country might not have lynching mobs, but you can't deny there are certain taboo topics in your society also, certain slurs and other opinions which would take you ages to clense and even then never fully. If an AI fake-porn of some ordinary person involving a minor was unleashed, think of the utter shame and horror they would be treated by people for the rest of their lives, even if it were proven false. No one would believe them, work with them, hire them, rent them, they would wish they had been lynched instead of the life they live.

roenxi 2y ago
But mob formation and mass social shaming on little evidence already happens without AI and it isn't clear why AI would make it worse. If it gets so easy to create fake videos that'll just muddy the waters and people would trust rumour less, not form mobs more. It happens once, then some wag creates videos of all the mob leaders blaspheming or whatever. Undermines the idea that the videos are the root cause.
- ryzvonusef 2y ago
  You are giving too much credence to the analytical capabilites to a lynch mob, and you are underestimating how much AI lowers the barrier for creating realistic 'proof' for incitement. Also there are no mob 'leaders'. These are everyday folks, these are you and me and my neighbours. A student pissed at a teacher could create a fake AI video of his teacher at night, and wake up to no pesky teacher and feel no remorse over what happened while he slept. The student was not a mob leader, just some dumbass who was angry at their teacher for giving bad grades, and had access to simple AI tools (soon available online for a trivial fee, if not free). ____ Be honest, are you 100% sure of the status of that facebook account you deleted in 2018? Zuck never deleted it, that content is still there to be mined and abused. Also not that hard to just log in to the damn thing and post something spicy. I don't remember if old posts can be edited in FB, cause that would allow the person to really gild the lily.
- benterix 2y ago
  > people would trust rumour less, not form mobs more I believe you are right. When the first unbelievable clips appeared on Facebook (where the most gullible people are), you could see the old ladies cheering "oh how wonderful! where did you film that?" Now in the comments section you will mostly see people saying "sheesh, stop polluting my feed with these fake AI-generated spam". Don't get me wrong, many people still fall for them, but the tendency seems clear - after all, we managed to survive because of learning.

pjc50 2y ago

The US equivalent is much less labour intensive than a lynch mob: it's mass shooters radicalized by things they've read on the internet. Or https://www.npr.org/2024/09/19/nx-s1-5114047/springfield-ohio-haitian-migrants-trump-safety-concerns https://www.npr.org/2024/09/19/nx-s1-5114047/springfield-ohi... , where repeating racial libel causes a public safety problem. While this kind of incitement in no way requires AI, it's certainly something that's easier to do when you can fake evidence. See also https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c5y87l6rx5wo https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c5y87l6rx5wo

fragmede 2y ago
https://apnews.com/article/ai-maryland-principal-voice-recording-663d5bc0714a3af221392cc6f1af985e https://apnews.com/article/ai-maryland-principal-voice-recor... In the US, freedom of speech means the government won't stifle you, but the court of public opinion will crucify you for saying the wrong thing. In the linked case, a school principal was framed for being a racist, a fire able offense. Better than being killed by religious extremists, I suppose, but still not great. Thankfully in this case they were able to find the perpetrator who faked evidence, but we have a problem.
psychlops 2y ago
The internet isn't always the bogeyman, the last assassin was radicalized by mass media.
jokethrowaway 2y ago
Yes, but after the invention of radio and television we already enabled mass indoctrination and mass brainwashing. The internet is more refined but the same principle. The solution is not to ban technology (it's impossible), but to create a more decentralised society where the majority of voters, which is easily brainwashed, doesn't get to dictate the life of the minority. We need to destroy and dismantle all the gigantic entities that ruin our life for the advantage of the few, whether they are the government or corporations ruled by billionaires controlling the government. We also need to create a better society with less mental illness, where people are not depressed by how unfair life is that they go on and kill kids in school - but I believe if we reduce large societal inequality this will sort itself out over time. Parents in my circle are already banning social medias for their kids until they're adults - so over time we'll evolve to get better at ignoring all the crap we get exposed to.

Ygg2 2y ago

The problem is AI. What if you post video of a politician eating babies, and that causes some nutjob to kill that politician? Sure, distrust everything digital, but what if only evidence of someone doing something wrong is digital?

charlieyu1 2y ago
People copied and pasted faces of celebrities on another photo since 1990s. Nothing significant happened.
- ryzvonusef 2y ago
  problem is not celebrities, problem is general every day people. With celeberaties, atleast they are famous enough that the idea of fakes exist... but you are Johnny nobody, that's not a fake, you just got caught and don't want to admit you said/did it! The court of public opinion is much smaller and personal, and 'evidence' is much more realistic and detailed.
  - Nathanba 2y ago
    general every day people will have to figure out that photoshop exists and that it contains AI now that can invent pictures from scratch. It should be easy to figure out, just explain that it can paint 100% realistically like a camera. The real issue is how people will start using this as a defense for criminal acts. "it wasn't me, all the camera footage is AI generated"
jokethrowaway 2y ago
Becoming famous always had its risks because of mentally ill people targeting you. Nothing new. The trick is being rich without being famous!
tomjen3 2y ago
What if someone printed yellow papers blaming Spain for a ship accident so the us would go to war with them?

flembat 2y ago

An individual is not responsible for the culture or government in the country they live in. In the UK a government was just elected with a historical absolute majority by only ten million people, and now first time offenders are being sent to prison for making stupid offensive statements online.

switch007 2y ago
Are you referring to this case? > In a now deleted post on her X account, Mrs Connolly, from Northampton, wrote: “Mass deportation now, set fire to all the f*** hotels full of the bastards for all I care… If that makes me racist, so be it. > The court heard Kay copied, pasted and uploaded Mrs Connolly’s post at 12.27pm on Wednesday from a BBC News report and added the hashtags #standwithlucyconnolly #lucyconnolly #f**northamptonshirepolice #conservative #FaragesRiots #RiotsUK and #Northampton. > As well as a post which urged people to “mask up” during a protest targeting an immigration law firm, Kay tweeted to his 127 followers at 2.34am: “That’s 100% the plan, plus gloves. No car either so no number plate to trace and a change of clothes ready nearby.” https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/northampton-bbc-news-southport-defence https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/northampton-bbc-...
- flembat 2y ago
  Free speech, should not just be for people we agree with. Although I agree conspiracy to commit a crime is something else. My point was that AI faked content could certainly get you locked up in the UK.

berniedurfee 2y ago

What country is immune to this? As far as I can tell the collective conscious of every country is swayed by propaganda. A written headline is enough to incite rage in any country much less a voice or video indistinguishable from the real thing. Folks in “developed’ countries have their lives destroyed or ended all the time based on rumors of something said or done.

bufferoverflow 2y ago
Any country that doesn't have executions by mobs. Used to be most nordic countries. Till they changed their immigration policies.
- JoeAltmaier 2y ago
  OR any number of non-racist forces at work e.g. the internet, movies and social norms changing everywhere.
  - bufferoverflow 2y ago
    Those are the mobs. Your average "non-racist" force is just racist to some other race.

bitnasty 2y ago

That may be true, but it doesn’t unkill the victims.