Technology

Think of the children being used to push an agenda that helps the very wealthy? Well I'll be, what a totally new and not at all predictable move.

Ban all ai that aren't owned by rich people, make open source impossible, restrict everything that might allow regular people to compete with the corporations - only then will you children be safe!

Creating fake child porn of real people using things like Photoshop is already illegal in the US, I don't see why new laws are required?

Just wait until them tech savvy folks in Congress try to understand the difference between 'deepfakes' in the sense of pasting a new face on existing footage and whole cloth generative AI creating the entire scene, and then someone tells them that the latter is derived from multiple existing media sources. Gonna be some smoke pouring out of their ears like in the cartoons trying to slice up all the specifics.

I really wonder whether this is the right move.

This girl, and many others, are victims and I don't want to diminish that, but I for better or worse I just don't see how legislation can resolve this.

Surely deepfakes will be just different enough to the subject to create reasonable doubt that it depicts the subject.

I wonder whether, as deep fakes become commonplace, people might be more willing to just ignore it like any other form of trolling.

FOSTA is still in effect and still causing harm to sex workers while actually protecting human traffickers from investigation (leaving victims stuck as captive labor / sex slaves for longer). And it'd still regarded by our federal legislators as a win, since they don't know any better and can still spin it as a win.

I don't believe our legislators can actually write a bill that won't be used by the federal Department of Justice merely to funnel kids for the sake of filling prison cells with warm bodies.

We've already seen DoJ's unnuanced approach to teen sexting which convicts teens engaging in normal romantic intercourse as professional producers of CSAM.

Its just more fuel for the US prison industrial complex. It is going to heavily affect impoverished kids caught in the crossfire while kids in richer families will get the Brock Turner treatment.

This bill is wholly for political points and has nothing to do with serving the public or addressing disruption due to new technology.

Until we reform or even abolish the law enforcement state, anything we criminalize will be repurposed to target poor and minorities and lock them up in unconscionable conditions.

This is just the tip of the iceberg of the threat AI poses to human social structures. We have yet to appreciate the gravity of what these new technologies enable. It's incredibly dangerous yet equally naive to think that AI-generated porn laws will keep us safe.

Firstly, the cat's out of the bag. We can ban the technology or its misuse all we like, but can we really practically stop people from computing mathematical functions? Legal or not, generative AI can and will be used to generate content that hurts people. We need better planning for identifying, authenticating, and responding when this misuse happens.

Secondly, we have an already huge, huge problem with fake news and disinformation. What is such a law for this special case of AI porn going to do for our inability to address harmful content?

It's a shame, but it strikes me as more feel-good than actually doing something effective.

There are already laws against creating false content about people, so adding more laws isn't going to make the previous laws more or less valid and it's only going to waste time and money.

Of course it's being pushed by a "teen" since this teen clearly doesn't have any understanding of the issues at hand, the technology at hand nor the laws that already exist to help them with this issue.

It was up to the adults around this teen to help her navigate the issue and instead the incompetent pieces of worthless shit choose to push a new bill against AI rather than use the current legal framework that exists to actually help this girl.

Anything to abuse a child or teens situation for their political gain. Worthless trash.

More laws that will only affect people who follow laws

I would have thought that deepfakes are defamation per se. The push to criminalize this is quite the break with American first amendment traditions.

If I understand correctly, this would put any image hoster, including Lemmy, in hot water because 230 immunity is only for civil suits and not federal criminal prosecution.

There is no world where a law aimed at this type of thing will ever be used for its intended purpose.

This is the best summary I could come up with:

A teenage victim of nonconsensual sexually explicit deepfakes joined Rep. Joe Morelle, D-N.Y., on Tuesday to advocate for a bipartisan bill that would criminalize sharing such material at the federal level.

In addition to criminalizing the nonconsensual sharing of sexually explicit deepfakes, the measure would also create a right of private action for victims to be able to sue creators and distributors of the material while remaining anonymous.

Mani said her school administration told her on Oct. 20 that male classmates had created and shared sexually explicit deepfakes of her and more than 30 other girls.

After he heard about what happened at Mani’s high school, which is in his hometown, Rep. Tom Kean, R.-N.J., became the first Republican co-sponsor of Morelle’s bill.

The lack of legislative movement around deepfakes has raised concerns about the technology’s potential to disrupt the 2024 election cycle.

A legal expert who specializes in nonconsensual intimate imagery, Mary Anne Franks, who Morelle said helped inform the bill, said deepfakes have already targeted female politicians.

The original article contains 457 words, the summary contains 169 words. Saved 63%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

If (as it seems) the point is not impersonation but damage to the person's honor/image, where exactly is the line?

If realism is the determining factor, what about a hyperrealistic human work? And if it is under human interpretation how realistic it should be, could a sketch be included?

How different is photoshopped fakes from AI fakes? Are we going to try to bad that too?

ETA: *ban that too. Thx phone kb.

I feel we are in need of a societal shift here, just like another commenter said about the printing press. When that first came out, the pushback was from the worry that the words would be attributed to someone who never said them (reverse plaigerism). The societal adjustment to this was the universal doubt that anyone said that thing without proof.

For generative AI, when it becomes widespread, photos will be generateable for literally everyone, not just minors but every person with photos online. It will be a societal shift; images will be assumed to be AI generated, making any guilt or shame about a nude photo existing obselete.

Just a matter of time so may as well start now!