Julia, 21, has received fake nude photos of herself generated by artificial intelligence. The phenomenon is exploding.
“I’d already heard about deepfakes and deepnudes (…) but I wasn’t really aware of it until it happened to me. It was a slightly anecdotal event that happened in other people’s lives, but it wouldn’t happen in mine”, thought Julia, a 21-year-old Belgian marketing student and semi-professional model.
At the end of September 2023, she received an email from an anonymous author. Subject: "Realistic? “We wonder which photo would best resemble you”, she reads.
Attached were five photos of her.
In the original content, posted on her social networks, Julia poses dressed. In front of her eyes are the same photos. Only this time, Julia is completely naked.
Julia has never posed naked. She never took these photos. The Belgian model realises that she has been the victim of a deepfake.
Is this different to how people would edit Britney Spears’ face onto porn stars in the 90s?
They’re easier to create and more realistic. The prevalence and magnitude of an immoral act impacts how it should be legislated. Personally I don’t care if people make these and keep it to themselves, but as soon as you spread it I think it’s immoral and harassment and there should be laws to prevent it.
Probably should have sued those people too… People need to cut this shit out. You’re fucking with others people’s life’s.
They’re not going to. There is an insane amount of entitlement around people’s jerk off material. Right here on Lemmy, I’ve seen someone (who denied being a child) call pornography a “human right” and groups of people insisting they should be able to openly trade images of child rape as long as they’re AI generated.
Fuck you people who equate pornography with child porn. You know what you’re doing, you sick bastards.
Pornography is not at all the same thing as child porn. Do not speak about them in the same way.
That sounds like an insane amount of entitlement from the one guy you found. Hopefully that entitles you to ignore everyone with even a fraction more nuance.
and groups of people insisting they should be able to openly trade images of child rape as long as they’re AI generated.
“Be able to” in what sense? Morally and ethically? No, absolutely not obviously. But what would the legal reason be to make it illegal since no actual children were involved? If I paint an explicit painting of a child being raped, is that illegal? I don’t think it would be. It would certainly give people good reason to be suspicious of me, but would it be illegal? And would an AI-generated image really be different?
I said it before, banning this doesn’t work. Legislation will always play catch up to the ever improving technologies, the best we can do is flood the internet with ai porn. Of everyone, as much as possible. To the point nobody even cares any more, because there is nudity of everyone. Normalize it before it ruins lives
Whatever I search on Pinterest, Google, Bing, the images there nowadays are mostly just AI generated. I am so used to them by now, I just don’t care anymore. Whatever makes me feel like it’s cool, I praise it. Recently hyper realistic AI generated videos have been popping up, and once there’s enough of datasets of free porn videos, which is most definitely coming out in a few years, the Porn industry is going to be filled with AI generated porn videos as well.
I think AI generated porn videos are going to be very realistic because there’s so much free porn.
This is going to be a serious issue in the future - either society changes and these things are going to be accepted or these kind of generating ai models have to be banned. But that’s still not going to be a “security” against it…
I also think we have to come up with digital watermarks that are easy to use…
Honestly, I see it as kinda freeing. Now people don’t have to worry about nudes leaking any more, since you can just say they’re fake. Somebody starts sending around deepfakes of me? OK, whatever, weirdo, it’s not real.
I’m guessing it’s easier to feel that way if your name is Justin.
If it was Justine, you might have issues.
Weird how that works.
Fair enough. Ideally it would be the same for women too, but we’re not there as a society yet.
I think there’s a big difference between creating them and spreading them, and putting punishments on spreading nudes against someone’s will, real or fake is a better 3rd option. The free speech implications of banning software that’s capable of creating them is too broad and fuzzy, but I think that putting harsh penalties on spreading them on the grounds of harassment would be clear cut and effective. I didn’t see a big difference in between spreading revenge porn and deep fakes and we already have laws against spreading revenge porn.
With ai and digital art… What is real? What is a person? What is a cartoon or a similar but not same likeness? In some cases what even is nudity? How old is an ai image? How can anything then be legal or illegal?
We gotta ban photo editing software too. Shit, we gotta ban computers entirely. Shit, now we have to ban electricity.
I’m so tired of this “Don’t blame the tool” bs argument used to divert responsibility.
Blame the fucking tool and restrict it.
Why not blame the spread? You can’t ban the tool, it’s easily accessible software and that only requires easily accessible consumer hardware, and you can even semi easily train your own models using easily accessible porn on the Internet, so if you want to ban it outright, you’d need to ban the general purpose tool, all porn, and the knowledge to train image generation models. If you mean ban the online apps that sell the service on the cloud, I can get behind that, it would increase the bar to create them a little, but that is far from a solution.
But, we already have laws against revenge porn and Internet harassment. I think the better and more feasible approach that doesn’t have far reaching free speech implications would be to simply put heavy penalties on spreading nudes images of people against their will, whether those images are real or fake. It’s harassment as revenge porn, and I didn’t see how it’s different if it’s a realistic fake. If there is major punishment for spreading these images then I think that will take care of discouraging the spread of the images for the vast majority of people.
Social media is a tool used to spread misinformation. Should social media be banned?
Where did it say anything about a Ministry of Truth deciding what can be posted online? Making it illegal and having a 3rd party decide if every post is allowed are two very different things
If it’s illegal then there are ramifications for the platform, the user posting it, and the tool that created it.
Content moderation is already a thing so it’s nothing new. Just one more thing on the list to check for when a post is reported
Making it illegal and having a 3rd party decide if every post is allowed are two very different things
Depends on the scale. If you’re a black man in the South in 1953, having a 3rd party decide whether you can do something means you can’t do that thing.
I’m not speaking to this particular topic, just saying in general 3rd parties can be corrupted. It’s not a foolproof solution or even always a good idea.
Yeah, sorry - I disagree on every level with your take.
I am also convinced that at least the LLMs will soon destroy themselves, due to the simple fact that “garbage in, garbage out”.
I seriously don’t get why society cares if there are photos of anyone’s private parts.
I think we as a society are too uptight about nudity, but that doesn’t mean that creating pictures of people without their consent, which make them feel uncomfortable, is in any way OK.
They are humiliated only because society has fed them the idea that what they’ve done (in this case not done but happened to them) is wrong. Internalizing shame meted out by society is the real psychological problem we need to fix.
Who are you tell people how they ought to feel? The desire for privacy is perfectly normal and you are the one trying to shame people for not wanting naked pictures of themselves everywhere.
I think the issue is that there is sexual imagery of the person being created and shared without that persons consent.
It’s akin to taking nude photos of someone without their consent, or sharing nude photos with someone other than their intended audience.
Even if there were no stigma attached to nudes, that doesn’t mean someone would their nudes to exist or be shared.
Modern surveillance capitalism has made sharing of private data normalised. These days we are very used to sharing pretty much everything about ourselves, in addition to having no control over how that information is used. That is a bad thing.
I suspect that these tools will, similarly, make nudity a bit more normalised in many societies across the world. That is probably a good thing overall.
What you mean to say is that non consensual nude pictures of women will be normalised and you’re ok with that. Sexual assault and domestic violence are also pretty common, you want to normalise those too?
In my opinion, an eventual loss of prudishness is just a silver lining on the cloud of surveillance capitalism.
Someone at TikTok has all the power to make nudes off every one in the planet except for 5 homeless guys from LA that you don’t want a nude from anyway. Tiktok has the images of you (you idiot) and the hardware and software required to fake you to everyone you know.
Welcome to China 2.0!
No, they don’t. Neither has Instagram, to my knowledge they have two, posted by other people. Now Grindr on the other hand…
Oh I would expect Grindr to call this a feature…
You liked Jeff, but Jer, for an extra $7.53 you can automatically see him naked to reveal the full package!
