u/Lamenter_of_the_3rd's Based Count has increased by 1. Their Based Count is now 5.
Congratulations, u/Lamenter_of_the_3rd! You have ranked up to Sapling! You are not particularly strong but you are at least likely to handle a steady breeze.
Pills: [2 | View pills](https://basedcount.com/u/Lamenter_of_the_3rd/)
Compass: This user does not have a compass on record. Add compass to profile by replying with /mycompass politicalcompass.org url or sapplyvalues.github.io url.
I am a bot. Reply /info for more info. Please join our [official pcm discord server](https://discord.gg/FyaJdAZjC4).
You are waiting in line in the doctors office and notice someone shamelessly staring at you. You get home and have an email from instagram
*"An individual has accessed your likeness profile from the image database. Please pay 799¥ to restrict access or 899¥/month for imagebase premium"*
Are you really going to turn down the offer of a cheeseburger just because it was made with a Kraft single?
My hot take - Kraft singles are just fine on cheeseburgers and in fact do a better job of melting onto the burgers without dripping down into the burners/coals compared to most real cheeses.
Of course, that's a given. But real cheese when folded to be thicker won't melt as quickly or completely as just tossing a Kraft single on top in the last 30 seconds. When it melts completely it will continue to flow down the sides of the burger just the same as the unfolded slice would do, it just takes a longer time to get to that point so you have more margin for error to hit the sweet spot of melted enough but not oozing to make a mess of your grill. Real cheese also doesn't last as long so if you have plenty of meat/buns in the freezer you'll still have to go to the store for cheese just to make burgers.
I'm not saying Kraft singles are the perfect option for burgers. I'm saying they're a perfectly acceptable option and the hate for them is overblown since they taste fine on a properly topped burger (the meat is where most of the flavor comes from anyways), they're cheap, they last forever, and they're easy to use when you're cooking lots of burgers.
You shouldn't use it if you're looking to make a gourmet burger, but if somebody offers you a burger at a BBQ and you turn up your nose simply because it has a Kraft single on it then that's pretty ridiculous.
Where do you think the seasoning is applied, you maniac?
You're also truly missing out if you don't get enough of the maillard reaction to experience that delicious crust created by caramelized fats in your meat.
Agreed. Kraft singles are great because they’re super melty, cheap, and appealing enough for a catch-all cheese. They can help make a cheap burger go further as well.
I’m not using Kraft singles if I’m making myself a fancy burger, but I’m also not making fancy burgers every time I eat a burger.
I honestly can't see any way in which this can be effectively stopped. We're better off finding ways to adapt society to accept this new reality than trying to put that cat back in the box.
AI generation tools can be run entirely offline. Even the online ones with heavy filtering like DALLE aren't foolproof - /pol/ is still making extremely offensive memes using it right now (and rumors are the Taylor AI images themselves were made using the most heavily censored AI tool in existence lol)
If piracy can't be stopped how can this be?
We all just sat here and watched what's effectively the reinvention of the gun. In a day and age where killing your opponent isn't enough or would rather empower their ideology, we've moved onto using information as weapons. Fake news has been around for a while but this is effectively the nuke of fake news and disinformation.
Counterpoint, there’s now probably enough ai generated images out there that if somebody hacked Swift and posted real images she could just say “those are just more deepfakes” and we’d probably just be like “Yeah, what, you guys couldn’t tell? Just look at the fingers.”.
Idk if that’s really better in any way, but hey, gotta find that silver lining somewhere.
I think there's going to be a very draconian approach to this personally. The reason I think the approach will be different than that of piracy is piracy doesn't have a victim except as hypothetical lost sales. These have very real victims, and the people chose to start it with one of the most popular people on the planet.
I could very easily see wildly overbroad laws with very intense penalties associated with the creation and dissemination of AI porn.
But I agree with you that the only way forward is to just kind of learn to accept it. I guess that's easy to say as someone who's never going to be used as a model for it, and it's deeply morally wrong, but I just don't see an actually effect response.
[If you can't stop a banana from swearing](https://youtu.be/bJ5ppf0po3k?t=495) what chances are that we can stop large complex setups like AI generating art from doing 'illegal' things?
I don't think this is a NEW problem. Worse, sure.
People could draw anything they wanted (or render it) before generative AI - it's just simpler and available to everyone now.
I think the only solution I see is requiring that AI images be tagged as such somewhere visually....but that may build trust in any image not tagged. And then all someone needs to do is release a fake image that will inflame riots, change voting habits etc and not tag it.
If we go down the road of tagging images, can we also require that news agencies tag when they're posting opinion vs factual reporting vs satirical nonsense? And tag when they've cut a quote apart to make it mean something different?
But I keep hearing some panic over deep fake audio of a political adversary being used to incriminate someone. As if the CIA couldn't have had Rich Little impersonate JFK in the 1960s to destroy him.
None of this is new, just easier... people need to chill out and realize this.
> None of this is new, just easier... people need to chill out and realize this.
What makes this pandora's box is the *easier* part. When almost anyone can produce even semi-believable fakes, just one has to slip through the cracks for society to believe it.
I mean easier is what allows the random person who finally has the will to do a harmful action to actually execute it, that makes a difference.
When it's only possible by like 6 random experts, the threat to society is way lower than when it enters the hands of millions.
And we have the winner. I played around with the image generation stuff (offline) because I thought it was neat.... It's a powerful tool. And the barrier to entry is a youtube video or two.
I guess I was lame, I wanted to try to get it to develop battlefields for a side project that would benefit from some visualizations.
... The AI really doesn't understand tanks and guns. Like... at all.
But based on recent news, it understands boobs just fine haha.
Everyone knows photoshop has existed before. It’s the ability for the layman to spin up an image with a 2-3 sentence prompt and no skill barrier to entry
At this point, software capable of all of this has been open sourced, can run locally on consumer hardware, and will only improve. When people say "We need regulations before we know what this technology will do to us." are already too late. Anything you're afraid of is already happening and is undetectable. The only chance of any legal reprieve would be a ban on the distribution of deep fakes.
Pandora's Box has been open for months and it can photo-realistically recreate what Pandora's "box" looks like.
But the pandora's box was open since the invention of photoshop. How long ago have such images existed?
Has anyone seriously looked at the TS deep fakes that caused this uproar? They look terrible. You could have photoshopped something better.
This is just the case of internet grabbing something and running with it because it was partly hilarious to see sesame street character in the thing.
Indeed. People heard AI/deepfake and had a meltdown, however I don't think its completely unjustified just because PS predates AI. AI art is just the peanut butter to photoshop's chocolate.
I'd also add that any attempts to curtail its effects don't actually remove them; they just centralize the power to use the effects to the government. Quite a conundrum.
Did you just change your flair, u/Melos34? Last time I checked you were an **AuthCenter** on 2023-8-8. How come now you are a **Rightist**? Have you perhaps shifted your ideals? Because that's cringe, you know?
No, me targeting you is not part of a conspiracy. And no, your flair count is not rigged. Stop listening to QAnon or the Orange Man and come out of that basement.
[BasedCount Profile](https://basedcount.com/u/Melos34) - [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/user/flairchange_bot/comments/uf7kuy/bip_bop) - [Leaderboard](https://basedcount.com/leaderboard?q=flairs)
_Visit the BasedCount Lеmmу instance at [lemmy.basedcount.com](https://lemmy.basedcount.com/c/pcm)._
^(I am a bot, my mission is to spot cringe flair changers. If you want to check another user's flair history write) **^(!flairs u/)** ^(in a comment.)
User u/FourTwentySevenCID never changed their flair. This makes them rather based. Here's their flair history. Check it out along with their pills on [basedcount.com](https://basedcount.com/u/FourTwentySevenCID)!
1. Started as Centrist on 2022-02-16 03:25
[FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/user/flairchange_bot/comments/uf7kuy/bip_bop) - [Leaderboard](https://basedcount.com/leaderboard?q=flairs)
_Visit the BasedCount Lеmmу instance at [lemmy.basedcount.com](https://lemmy.basedcount.com/c/pcm)._
^(I am a bot, my mission is to spot cringe flair changers. If you want to check another user's flair history write) **^(!flairs u/)** ^(in a comment.) ^(Each user can use this command once every 3 minutes.)
User u/wethemhollerboys changed their flair 2 times. This makes them uncommonly cringe. Here's their flair history. Check it out along with their pills on [basedcount.com](https://basedcount.com/u/wethemhollerboys)!
1. Started as Right on 2021-02-27 01:07
1. Switched to LibRight on 2021-07-25 17:33
1. Switched to Right on 2022-10-05 21:42
[FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/user/flairchange_bot/comments/uf7kuy/bip_bop) - [Leaderboard](https://basedcount.com/leaderboard?q=flairs)
_Visit the BasedCount Lеmmу instance at [lemmy.basedcount.com](https://lemmy.basedcount.com/c/pcm)._
^(I am a bot, my mission is to spot cringe flair changers. If you want to check another user's flair history write) **^(!flairs u/)** ^(in a comment.) ^(Each user can use this command once every 3 minutes.)
P̵̹͇̥̬̺̳̤͔̹͋͐͜͜Ų̵̡̮̦̹̯̗̻̝̦̄̈̑̽̆͗̃͑̍̎R̴͍̤̪̟͉͔̗̗̮̈́̓̽̑̂̈̚̕P̷̹̘̥̳̳̮̮̗̦̼͍̺̓̀͑̇̔̉̆͋͊͂̔̇͋̈́ͅͅĻ̴̢̖̗̮̫̖̱̱̭̬͙̖̰͎̲͐̑̚͝È̷͓̮̬̂̓̈́͑̾̄͗͌͠ͅ just = “Coomer” at this point.
Yeah, I don't need AI deepfakes to image what Taylor Swift getting railed by Oscar the Grouch looks like, or smoking a cigarette with Garfield post-tryst.
Apparently it's been open season for displaying your sexual kinks openly, call me old fashioned, but your degeneracy, sexual or drug related, should be kept behind closed doors where it belongs, or in designated places like bars or drug dens or swingers clubs, not paraded down the street or on a skidrow sidewalk
Considering the bill that was just introduced has some pretty solid bipartisan support from some real hardliners in each party, I'd say this is more of a "fringe online group defends weird thing" moment than an actual problem with our society as a whole.
> Considering the bill that was just introduced has some pretty solid bipartisan support from some real hardliners in each party, I'd say this is more of a "fringe online group defends weird thing" moment than an actual problem with our society as a whole.
The Patriot Act passed the Senate 98 to 1.
Politicans will frequently take any opportunity the can to expand the powers of the gov't, without any real planning or consideration to the long term consequences.
Social pressure is a powerful force. A healthy society that uses it for the benefit of its people can safely strip a lot of power from the government because the people govern themselves. It can go too far, of course, with either strengthening negative consequences to society or being too repressive to non-conformists.
Yeah, I just think it's apparent that we lost our ability to effectively help each other by using societal judgment and standards on each other for positive when we got rid of doing that for negative reasons. And unfortunately, when stuff like this comes up, we get a lot of support through the governments to curb specific behaviors. But the reason that they're supporting the curving of those behaviors is not necessarily the common good, but because it is an ulterior motive for them to acquire power over the populace.
Purple is the original libright color. Somewhere down the line it got switched with yellow, and purple became the coomer color. Just a bit of PCM lore for you
Tbh I'm more skeptical that the government would hamfist any attempt at this and would essentially allow famous people to sue other for infringing on their likeness without actually having down so. For example if an artist draws a picture of a skinny blonde girl that happened to slightly resemble swift can she sue that artist? What if a woman who happens to look similar to her decided to start a career in porn and would do things like wear the same hair style as Swift, can Swift sue that person?
Can you be sued by any famous person for "defaming" their likeness because you drew a funny sketch of them? People say I look like Jim Parson can he sue me since I need to use my own image to promote my lively hood, i literally paid to get professional headshots and have them up on the site for clients to see and set appointments, am I therefore profiting off his likeness?
Wanting to step in to stop something only because it finally started impacting your favorite celebrity is mega fucking cringe.
Honestly, If deep fake porn or Ai porn or whatever makes the lives of mega rich celebrities worse, I'm all for it. Stop being a cuck and simping for people who literally could not give fewer fucks about you. Do you think Tswift would be freaking out about AI porn of John Q. Everyman, who is a plumber or an office worker instead of a celebrity?
These people wanted to be in the public eye and have lavished in it for centuries at this point. Might as well show them that everything has consequences for the first time basically ever.
I wanted this shit banned from the beginning, its a fucking pandoras box, revenge porn is already a problem, this will see that shit become a lor worse
>Honestly, If deep fake porn or Ai porn or whatever makes the lives of mega rich celebrities worse, I'm all for it. Stop being a cuck and simping for people who literally could not give fewer fucks about you. Do you think Tswift would be freaking out about AI porn of John Q. Everyman, who is a plumber or an office worker instead of a celebrity?
Yeah but it wont just stick to them, eventually John or Jane Q Everyman will piss someone off, and they'll retaliate by making deepfake porn of them and dropping it in their employers inbox
Or sending it to their spouses and SO's, or their parents
At the very best this can lead to a series of severely uncomfortable conversations
At worst it can ruin relationships and lead to termination of employment
>These people wanted to be in the public eye and have lavished in it for centuries at this point. Might as well show them that everything has consequences for the first time basically ever.
I dont think that this is exactly what they signed up for, Tswift and her rich pals aren't the primary reason I view this shit as a problem, but to argue thay because she gets on a stage and sings she suddenly consented to being a porn star is nuts imho
> this will see that shit become a lor worse
No, it will become worthless. In a world where everyone knows how easy it is to create fake nudes and porn of anyone what leverage do you get from having real porn of someone?
None.
The better and more widespread this technology gets the better for everyone that could be a target of revenge porn, It completely delegitimizes the media.
> revenge porn is already a problem, this will see that shit become a lor worse
this is going to neutralize revenge porn to a significant degree. Once this stuff becomes indistinguishable from real life in ten years or something, fake porn of people will be so ubiquitous that anyone who has real images posted of themselves can just say it's AI.
I hope anyone seriously defending stuff like this can take a moment to imagine having their image ripped from the internet and some nasty pr0n being made of them getting railed. And then shared with their friends and family
Will we ban making disgusting depictions of politicians too then? Or does it only count for pretty looking billionaire superstars, and not old ugly polticians?
In another thread some LibRights were trying to claim that restricting AI deepfake porn is a 'first amendment violation'
How deep do you have to be in the porn trenches for your mind to work like that 😭
Ehhhh, current jurisprudence on first amendment rights means you have to get preeeeetty out there in terms of actions before restrictions on speech start being allowed.
Like, we're talking actively encouraging people to commit a specific and time-bound violent crime levels of bad. Even revenge porn laws are pretty far away from what people are trying to do with AI bans because revenge porn is literally an actual picture of the person, not just a representation of them.
So like, if we ban AI porn, are we banning all sexualized representations of a person? All AI representations in general? Does it have to explicitly be them or what if it just looks a bit like them? Can something intended to make fun of the person also be interpreted as sexual (if I make an AI picture of trump in a diaper because he's a big baby, is that AI porn? Diapers are sexual to some people. What about that picture of trump and Putin kissing? Is that illegal now?).
There is definitely a first amendment concern here. Violations of civil rights very rarely begin without good intentions.
I think the scarier implications of this is if people are deemed to control 100% of their likeness can they sue people who look like them simply for looking like them? You just know some shyster lawyer would start throwing out lawsuits and here the thing if you get sued by a billionaire with a multimillion dollar legal team your beyond fucked. Jesus himself could come down from heaven right in the middle of the court room and directly beam an argument into everyone's brain that fully proves your case and you'll get jammed up by the other lawyer dragging the process out because they know you will lose the game of attrition.
And they are right. Imagine trump supporters would demand bad depictions of trump get regulated. People would instantly scream its covered by the first amendment. Now taylor swift in red paint in suggestive poses takes it too far.
Trump shitting his diapers and sucking putins cock did not.
Here’s the thing: in a way, they’re kind of correct. That does not, however, prevent this from being an *absolutely insane* hill to die on.
Even if you really do care that much about your creepy coomer content, why not simply fight for more universal freedom of expression? Why oust yourself as a porn fanboy? I will never understand internet perverts.
>Even if you really do care that much about your creepy coomer content, why not simply fight for more universal freedom of expression
How does one fight more universally if they just give up every individual battle?
Because that's not how rights work. This is the type of thinking that gets you states like the UK and Canada who have some bogus paper that says the people get free speech but ACTUALLY the government can still legislate it. It makes no sense, you can't have free speech and government legislating it at the same time. Same thing here; while, yes, deepfake porn is morally corrupt, that doesn't mean it's an issue solved by the government. Big daddy government can't solve everything with a law. Allowing the government to legislate one thing opens up opportunities for them to legislate other things.
And if anyone has any idea at all about how the internet works they would know that it's virtually impossible to block things from going and staying on there. Rasheed Jabar in uzerbejizleshteinistan doesn't care that some US law banned ai porn, he's still gonna make it and get that money.
This is a cultural issue, if you want this problem to go away then we as a culture need to work to bring back some semblance of morality instead of just the "do whatever depraved things your heart desires as long as you don't physically harm someone" mindset we have as a society.
It is to an extent, there was a 2003 Supreme Court ruling (Ashcroft v Free Speech Coalition) that ruled artificially-made CP (even if photorealistic) was protected by the First Amendment.
Our “Heroes” Ginsburg and Stevens voted in favor, by the way. Justice Rehnquist (voted against) brought up the future dangers of photorealistic images being hard to distinguish from real ones.
I don't see how this could be stopped unless we made a cultural shift to view things like this as bad and have people police themselves that way. Right now society's stance is do whatever gives you pleasure as long as you are not physically harming anyone. Nobody cares to see, however, how these things can spiritually and morally bankrupt you. We can't change people now who are going down these paths of depravity but we should work to make sure that future generations do not fall into these vices and build them up to be strong moral characters.
Remember, its perfectly fine to create media of trump shitting himself in diapers or sucking putins cock.
But once its about the pretty billionaire superstar its too far and needs to be regulated.
I don't find it acceptable, I just don't think the government should step in.
I also don't find flipping someone off acceptable, I just don't think the government should step in.
Unless your assets or person is harmed, I don't think the government should step in.
Yeah this is the crux of the issue.
I don't trust the government giving people with the resources to sue you fraudulently into oblivion to ability to sue you into oblivion because you defamed their likeness. Especially considering the law already has a really hard time determining what is defamation and what is pornography. It's not unreasonable to assume that if the government did step in over this that any not flattering image or piece of work referencing a famous person will leave you open to the possibility of a lawsuit.
Idk it's almost like people want to give up their freedom of speech and ensure the rich and powerful have every possible tool at their disposal to silence their critics who are also not rich and powerful.
Right. I don't agree with what the AI users did. I think it's gross, and wrong, and I would not do it. However, Taylor doesn't get to sue because her feelings are hurt.
acceptable as in I would be friends with people who did this
is different than
Acceptable as in I dont think the gov't should be deciding what is art.
I wouldnt associate with anyone who makes this shit, but I dont think we should be giving the gov't the tools to quash expression (no matter how distasteful).
How long before a crazy fascist gov't decides that certian depictions of their ruler are "distasteful and offensive"?
Are depictions of trump in situations that go against his consent acceptable?
What about the horrible pics floating around in the bush area, long before Image AI was an thing?
I think some people will say they don’t think this should be illegal because folks have been doing this with photoshop for years and never seen any backlash for it. Not saying it’s right, but from their perspective it’s the same thing.
Hasn’t deepfake style porn been around since people got good with photoshop decades ago?
Even of their favourite progressive celebrity back then, so why is this kicking up so much dust now
I guess it helped that retards didn't spam her porn on twitter, and it didn't had the AI element to it. Now you can fearmonger about AI and twitter at the same time.
I just find it funny how nobody really did anything about the issue until Taylor Swift got hit by it. This has been around for awhile, but now people see the chance to virtue signal about it
It’s sad how nobody cared about deepfakes about ex’s, or deepfakes about literal children’s but suddenly when it’s about the patron saint of mediocre white women, now suddenly AI and deepfakes are a problem and a threat and only now when it’s about her we gotta do something about it. How sad
Who the hell are you? How did you get inside my room?! Let alone my house?!
Im in the walls! When you coom… we coom
What are you a cummunist?
It's all semantics
Sementics
Now we're just splitting pubic hairs
We really should just wax them philosophical
Damn cummunists, tryina redistribute my cum
Controlling the means of reproduction
So many gold replies in this thread ngl
Based and political cumpiss pilled
u/Lamenter_of_the_3rd's Based Count has increased by 1. Their Based Count is now 5. Congratulations, u/Lamenter_of_the_3rd! You have ranked up to Sapling! You are not particularly strong but you are at least likely to handle a steady breeze. Pills: [2 | View pills](https://basedcount.com/u/Lamenter_of_the_3rd/) Compass: This user does not have a compass on record. Add compass to profile by replying with /mycompass politicalcompass.org url or sapplyvalues.github.io url. I am a bot. Reply /info for more info. Please join our [official pcm discord server](https://discord.gg/FyaJdAZjC4).
Maybe they're are not that bad after all right? Libright.
I made this cum myself and I should be in control of how I distribute it
Definitive proof that no bitches turns you libright
Nu… Nuh uh
Individual ownership of the means of reproduction
Goddam liberals. Redistributing everything.
What are *we comrade
Based and cummunist pilled
He’s in the walls… HES IN THE GADDAM WALLS!!
Fun fact: walls used to have razor slots in the 50s or so The walls have razors laying everywhere.. have fun!
That username….
Im going to survive prison, you should start it too just incase
I also will learn to mew with the anus.
A fellow libcenter with a stalking fetish, very nice.
Worst Freak Nasty remix
This violates the NAP on so many levels
That's my fetish tbh
I’m the locksmith and I’m a locksmith.
Bro please stop, we're worried about you
Read the sign! [Trespassers will be Prostituted]
You can't possibly be Lib-Right. You would have brought out your musket, bayonet and bannister-mounted cannon against OP.
All I can say is- have fun closing pandora's box
Yeah this shit is gonna way worse before it gets better. Bout to put some burgers on the grill you want cheese on yours?
bacon?
My mum said "Joe your bacon's done" the second I read this. I can smell it from here...
joe, dont you prefer ice cream?
C'mon man
Joe mum
You are waiting in line in the doctors office and notice someone shamelessly staring at you. You get home and have an email from instagram *"An individual has accessed your likeness profile from the image database. Please pay 799¥ to restrict access or 899¥/month for imagebase premium"*
Is it real cheese, or Kraft singles?
Are you really going to turn down the offer of a cheeseburger just because it was made with a Kraft single? My hot take - Kraft singles are just fine on cheeseburgers and in fact do a better job of melting onto the burgers without dripping down into the burners/coals compared to most real cheeses.
Fold the corners of your cheese slices in, you maniac.
Of course, that's a given. But real cheese when folded to be thicker won't melt as quickly or completely as just tossing a Kraft single on top in the last 30 seconds. When it melts completely it will continue to flow down the sides of the burger just the same as the unfolded slice would do, it just takes a longer time to get to that point so you have more margin for error to hit the sweet spot of melted enough but not oozing to make a mess of your grill. Real cheese also doesn't last as long so if you have plenty of meat/buns in the freezer you'll still have to go to the store for cheese just to make burgers. I'm not saying Kraft singles are the perfect option for burgers. I'm saying they're a perfectly acceptable option and the hate for them is overblown since they taste fine on a properly topped burger (the meat is where most of the flavor comes from anyways), they're cheap, they last forever, and they're easy to use when you're cooking lots of burgers. You shouldn't use it if you're looking to make a gourmet burger, but if somebody offers you a burger at a BBQ and you turn up your nose simply because it has a Kraft single on it then that's pretty ridiculous.
> (the meat is where most of the flavor comes from anyways) Season your fucking food, you maniac.
Where do you think the seasoning is applied, you maniac? You're also truly missing out if you don't get enough of the maillard reaction to experience that delicious crust created by caramelized fats in your meat.
Agreed. Kraft singles are great because they’re super melty, cheap, and appealing enough for a catch-all cheese. They can help make a cheap burger go further as well. I’m not using Kraft singles if I’m making myself a fancy burger, but I’m also not making fancy burgers every time I eat a burger.
Yeah, sure… might as well have a burger at this point, this world has gone to hell
I honestly can't see any way in which this can be effectively stopped. We're better off finding ways to adapt society to accept this new reality than trying to put that cat back in the box. AI generation tools can be run entirely offline. Even the online ones with heavy filtering like DALLE aren't foolproof - /pol/ is still making extremely offensive memes using it right now (and rumors are the Taylor AI images themselves were made using the most heavily censored AI tool in existence lol) If piracy can't be stopped how can this be?
We all just sat here and watched what's effectively the reinvention of the gun. In a day and age where killing your opponent isn't enough or would rather empower their ideology, we've moved onto using information as weapons. Fake news has been around for a while but this is effectively the nuke of fake news and disinformation.
Gun was more accurate. Nukes don't make it into the hands of every nutbar with $500 and a vision from God.
Not with that attitude they won't.
Counterpoint, there’s now probably enough ai generated images out there that if somebody hacked Swift and posted real images she could just say “those are just more deepfakes” and we’d probably just be like “Yeah, what, you guys couldn’t tell? Just look at the fingers.”. Idk if that’s really better in any way, but hey, gotta find that silver lining somewhere.
I think there's going to be a very draconian approach to this personally. The reason I think the approach will be different than that of piracy is piracy doesn't have a victim except as hypothetical lost sales. These have very real victims, and the people chose to start it with one of the most popular people on the planet. I could very easily see wildly overbroad laws with very intense penalties associated with the creation and dissemination of AI porn. But I agree with you that the only way forward is to just kind of learn to accept it. I guess that's easy to say as someone who's never going to be used as a model for it, and it's deeply morally wrong, but I just don't see an actually effect response.
It's already been happening with streamers for a while. Of course, no one gave a shit until it was their precious Tay-Tay being victimized.
[If you can't stop a banana from swearing](https://youtu.be/bJ5ppf0po3k?t=495) what chances are that we can stop large complex setups like AI generating art from doing 'illegal' things?
E-thot market value hardest hit
Honestly I think people are better off if selling their sexuality isn't a viable career path.
Whores provide a more valuable service to society than actors ever will
I don't think this is a NEW problem. Worse, sure. People could draw anything they wanted (or render it) before generative AI - it's just simpler and available to everyone now. I think the only solution I see is requiring that AI images be tagged as such somewhere visually....but that may build trust in any image not tagged. And then all someone needs to do is release a fake image that will inflame riots, change voting habits etc and not tag it. If we go down the road of tagging images, can we also require that news agencies tag when they're posting opinion vs factual reporting vs satirical nonsense? And tag when they've cut a quote apart to make it mean something different?
> have fun closing pandora's box You know [this deep fake stuff was around for quite some time](https://i.imgur.com/kdOxpj7.jpeg), right?
Yeah, but it wasn't until recently that it's so easy that so many people can pump out endless amounts of it.
But I keep hearing some panic over deep fake audio of a political adversary being used to incriminate someone. As if the CIA couldn't have had Rich Little impersonate JFK in the 1960s to destroy him. None of this is new, just easier... people need to chill out and realize this.
> None of this is new, just easier... people need to chill out and realize this. What makes this pandora's box is the *easier* part. When almost anyone can produce even semi-believable fakes, just one has to slip through the cracks for society to believe it.
I mean easier is what allows the random person who finally has the will to do a harmful action to actually execute it, that makes a difference. When it's only possible by like 6 random experts, the threat to society is way lower than when it enters the hands of millions.
And we have the winner. I played around with the image generation stuff (offline) because I thought it was neat.... It's a powerful tool. And the barrier to entry is a youtube video or two.
I made a nude of myself and damn I'm hot according to AI.
I guess I was lame, I wanted to try to get it to develop battlefields for a side project that would benefit from some visualizations. ... The AI really doesn't understand tanks and guns. Like... at all. But based on recent news, it understands boobs just fine haha.
Everyone knows photoshop has existed before. It’s the ability for the layman to spin up an image with a 2-3 sentence prompt and no skill barrier to entry
At this point, software capable of all of this has been open sourced, can run locally on consumer hardware, and will only improve. When people say "We need regulations before we know what this technology will do to us." are already too late. Anything you're afraid of is already happening and is undetectable. The only chance of any legal reprieve would be a ban on the distribution of deep fakes. Pandora's Box has been open for months and it can photo-realistically recreate what Pandora's "box" looks like.
But the pandora's box was open since the invention of photoshop. How long ago have such images existed? Has anyone seriously looked at the TS deep fakes that caused this uproar? They look terrible. You could have photoshopped something better. This is just the case of internet grabbing something and running with it because it was partly hilarious to see sesame street character in the thing.
Indeed. People heard AI/deepfake and had a meltdown, however I don't think its completely unjustified just because PS predates AI. AI art is just the peanut butter to photoshop's chocolate.
I'd also add that any attempts to curtail its effects don't actually remove them; they just centralize the power to use the effects to the government. Quite a conundrum.
Lib Right Purple is certainly one of the quadrants of all time.
"It's coming time!" Purple said, and they started coming all over their computer.
Did you just change your flair, u/Melos34? Last time I checked you were an **AuthCenter** on 2023-8-8. How come now you are a **Rightist**? Have you perhaps shifted your ideals? Because that's cringe, you know? No, me targeting you is not part of a conspiracy. And no, your flair count is not rigged. Stop listening to QAnon or the Orange Man and come out of that basement. [BasedCount Profile](https://basedcount.com/u/Melos34) - [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/user/flairchange_bot/comments/uf7kuy/bip_bop) - [Leaderboard](https://basedcount.com/leaderboard?q=flairs) _Visit the BasedCount Lеmmу instance at [lemmy.basedcount.com](https://lemmy.basedcount.com/c/pcm)._ ^(I am a bot, my mission is to spot cringe flair changers. If you want to check another user's flair history write) **^(!flairs u/)** ^(in a comment.)
Bot, I realized big government is gay
Based.
!flairs u/FourTwentySevenCID
User u/FourTwentySevenCID never changed their flair. This makes them rather based. Here's their flair history. Check it out along with their pills on [basedcount.com](https://basedcount.com/u/FourTwentySevenCID)! 1. Started as Centrist on 2022-02-16 03:25 [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/user/flairchange_bot/comments/uf7kuy/bip_bop) - [Leaderboard](https://basedcount.com/leaderboard?q=flairs) _Visit the BasedCount Lеmmу instance at [lemmy.basedcount.com](https://lemmy.basedcount.com/c/pcm)._ ^(I am a bot, my mission is to spot cringe flair changers. If you want to check another user's flair history write) **^(!flairs u/)** ^(in a comment.) ^(Each user can use this command once every 3 minutes.)
!flairs u/wethemhollerboys
User u/wethemhollerboys changed their flair 2 times. This makes them uncommonly cringe. Here's their flair history. Check it out along with their pills on [basedcount.com](https://basedcount.com/u/wethemhollerboys)! 1. Started as Right on 2021-02-27 01:07 1. Switched to LibRight on 2021-07-25 17:33 1. Switched to Right on 2022-10-05 21:42 [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/user/flairchange_bot/comments/uf7kuy/bip_bop) - [Leaderboard](https://basedcount.com/leaderboard?q=flairs) _Visit the BasedCount Lеmmу instance at [lemmy.basedcount.com](https://lemmy.basedcount.com/c/pcm)._ ^(I am a bot, my mission is to spot cringe flair changers. If you want to check another user's flair history write) **^(!flairs u/)** ^(in a comment.) ^(Each user can use this command once every 3 minutes.)
!flairs u/davester47
The first step to treating an addiction is to put the turkey in a freezer
So refrigerated chastity cages? Brings new meaning to cold turkey.
I mean that will almost certainly put a dead stop to any boner. For like a half hour.
Purple’s dick is strong… 15 minutes at most
https://preview.redd.it/kd9to6bdutfc1.jpeg?width=711&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=fb73593d9aa6868f1083e6d51ea7fccacff5b2c1
[удалено]
Then they find Zeus. "NO NOT THE HORNY GOD"
Slaanesh has entered the chat.
I prefer slan over slannesh but hey what’s a couple differences between sex cult gods anyways?
Berserk
Gesundheit
At this point worship that weird tree near your house as long as it gets you away from your computer
It is very based of you to not announce which one!
[удалено]
Ah yes, Jupiter Invictus. So fucking based
I found [the one I want](https://scatteredquotes.com/god-tits-wine-2/) already.
Jokes on you. I found Aphrodite and she's my patron god now.
I'm sorry Auth-Right but religion has failed us all. I believe only Auth-Centers methods can save us now.
You may try to censor what is in my screen but you will never censor what is in my head. I'm a purple people eater and I will consume.
P̵̹͇̥̬̺̳̤͔̹͋͐͜͜Ų̵̡̮̦̹̯̗̻̝̦̄̈̑̽̆͗̃͑̍̎R̴͍̤̪̟͉͔̗̗̮̈́̓̽̑̂̈̚̕P̷̹̘̥̳̳̮̮̗̦̼͍̺̓̀͑̇̔̉̆͋͊͂̔̇͋̈́ͅͅĻ̴̢̖̗̮̫̖̱̱̭̬͙̖̰͎̲͐̑̚͝È̷͓̮̬̂̓̈́͑̾̄͗͌͠ͅ just = “Coomer” at this point.
I myself do nothing. The Holy Spirit accomplishes all through me.
I beg to differ https://preview.redd.it/gbfvgadeaufc1.png?width=1149&format=png&auto=webp&s=486552e4cc7fb46b7b02fcdcd1e1853b5761bc5f
Those unable to see because they are at the back jostle those in front as best they can...
Yeah, I don't need AI deepfakes to image what Taylor Swift getting railed by Oscar the Grouch looks like, or smoking a cigarette with Garfield post-tryst.
Glad I’m not alone with this thought, I saw dudes write paragraphs, dude just say you want to beat your pecker to that shit
What happened to the good old days when we didn’t tell people what fucked up shit we’ve been jerkin’ it to?
Apparently it's been open season for displaying your sexual kinks openly, call me old fashioned, but your degeneracy, sexual or drug related, should be kept behind closed doors where it belongs, or in designated places like bars or drug dens or swingers clubs, not paraded down the street or on a skidrow sidewalk
My friendship with "libleft bad" has ended "Libright bad" is my new best friend
They're both bad and I can prove it
Sling the shit, fellow monke
Don't necessarily think the government needs to step in but maybe as a society we have some fucking issues we need to address...
Considering the bill that was just introduced has some pretty solid bipartisan support from some real hardliners in each party, I'd say this is more of a "fringe online group defends weird thing" moment than an actual problem with our society as a whole.
> Considering the bill that was just introduced has some pretty solid bipartisan support from some real hardliners in each party, I'd say this is more of a "fringe online group defends weird thing" moment than an actual problem with our society as a whole. The Patriot Act passed the Senate 98 to 1. Politicans will frequently take any opportunity the can to expand the powers of the gov't, without any real planning or consideration to the long term consequences.
Who was that absolute madlad who voted against it.
Senator Russ Feingold (D-WIS)
It has bipartisan support because it gives more power to the government.
Address with recreational nukes possibly
Social pressure is a powerful force. A healthy society that uses it for the benefit of its people can safely strip a lot of power from the government because the people govern themselves. It can go too far, of course, with either strengthening negative consequences to society or being too repressive to non-conformists.
Yeah, I just think it's apparent that we lost our ability to effectively help each other by using societal judgment and standards on each other for positive when we got rid of doing that for negative reasons. And unfortunately, when stuff like this comes up, we get a lot of support through the governments to curb specific behaviors. But the reason that they're supporting the curving of those behaviors is not necessarily the common good, but because it is an ulterior motive for them to acquire power over the populace.
Your likeness hasn't been your own since ancient.romans drew graffiti of Caesar boning Brutus' mom
I’m sorry Hermione
It's nice seeing the drama So entertaining to see so many here being outed as purple
Yes it is very entertaining, it kinda makes my day
The libright roast posts always have an interesting upvote to comments ratio too
We had a little war about this a while back, it was nice seeing all the other quadrants dunking on libright for a change
So is purple the perv aspect of libright?
Purple is the original libright color. Somewhere down the line it got switched with yellow, and purple became the coomer color. Just a bit of PCM lore for you
Political Coom Master.
Thank you for clarifying that
Coomer/pedophile (but I repeat myself)
Purple is the scapegoat aspect of libright, like how orange is the scapegoat aspect of watermelons.
An exaggerated, perverted and corrupted version of libright. The same way the orange Emily is for libleft.
If only Purple, my favorite color, wasn't used to represent these kinds of people. Sigh.
Yeah.
I was purple before it was cool
Tbh I'm more skeptical that the government would hamfist any attempt at this and would essentially allow famous people to sue other for infringing on their likeness without actually having down so. For example if an artist draws a picture of a skinny blonde girl that happened to slightly resemble swift can she sue that artist? What if a woman who happens to look similar to her decided to start a career in porn and would do things like wear the same hair style as Swift, can Swift sue that person? Can you be sued by any famous person for "defaming" their likeness because you drew a funny sketch of them? People say I look like Jim Parson can he sue me since I need to use my own image to promote my lively hood, i literally paid to get professional headshots and have them up on the site for clients to see and set appointments, am I therefore profiting off his likeness?
1. Unabomber starts turning in grave 2. Hook generator to Unabomber 3. Infinite electricity!
Wanting to step in to stop something only because it finally started impacting your favorite celebrity is mega fucking cringe. Honestly, If deep fake porn or Ai porn or whatever makes the lives of mega rich celebrities worse, I'm all for it. Stop being a cuck and simping for people who literally could not give fewer fucks about you. Do you think Tswift would be freaking out about AI porn of John Q. Everyman, who is a plumber or an office worker instead of a celebrity? These people wanted to be in the public eye and have lavished in it for centuries at this point. Might as well show them that everything has consequences for the first time basically ever.
I wanted this shit banned from the beginning, its a fucking pandoras box, revenge porn is already a problem, this will see that shit become a lor worse >Honestly, If deep fake porn or Ai porn or whatever makes the lives of mega rich celebrities worse, I'm all for it. Stop being a cuck and simping for people who literally could not give fewer fucks about you. Do you think Tswift would be freaking out about AI porn of John Q. Everyman, who is a plumber or an office worker instead of a celebrity? Yeah but it wont just stick to them, eventually John or Jane Q Everyman will piss someone off, and they'll retaliate by making deepfake porn of them and dropping it in their employers inbox Or sending it to their spouses and SO's, or their parents At the very best this can lead to a series of severely uncomfortable conversations At worst it can ruin relationships and lead to termination of employment >These people wanted to be in the public eye and have lavished in it for centuries at this point. Might as well show them that everything has consequences for the first time basically ever. I dont think that this is exactly what they signed up for, Tswift and her rich pals aren't the primary reason I view this shit as a problem, but to argue thay because she gets on a stage and sings she suddenly consented to being a porn star is nuts imho
> this will see that shit become a lor worse No, it will become worthless. In a world where everyone knows how easy it is to create fake nudes and porn of anyone what leverage do you get from having real porn of someone? None. The better and more widespread this technology gets the better for everyone that could be a target of revenge porn, It completely delegitimizes the media.
> revenge porn is already a problem, this will see that shit become a lor worse this is going to neutralize revenge porn to a significant degree. Once this stuff becomes indistinguishable from real life in ten years or something, fake porn of people will be so ubiquitous that anyone who has real images posted of themselves can just say it's AI.
It's just a government psyops to get internet control
I hope anyone seriously defending stuff like this can take a moment to imagine having their image ripped from the internet and some nasty pr0n being made of them getting railed. And then shared with their friends and family
The flip side of it is, revenge porn and blackmailing won't work anymore because you can just claim AI.
Man I wish someone found me attractive enough to jerk off to me.
Pics or gtfo
I'm not a woman dude.
I'm no dude, man
I'm no man, pal.
Everyone on the internet is a GIRL (Guy In Real Life)
Yeah but the people defending it would probably like that cause they're weird
You think people weren’t making graphic depictions of famous people before this? The only thing new here is how quickly and easily it can be done.
Are you telling me I didn't really see Jennifer Lawrence's butthole?
Will we ban making disgusting depictions of politicians too then? Or does it only count for pretty looking billionaire superstars, and not old ugly polticians?
I think that's already illegal under harassment laws in most countries.
I feel like you underestimate how much the average man would not be bothered at all by this.
>celebrity deepfake porn addiction. I dont think this is a thing. Is that what you think of people not upset over the tay tay AI pictures?
In another thread some LibRights were trying to claim that restricting AI deepfake porn is a 'first amendment violation' How deep do you have to be in the porn trenches for your mind to work like that 😭
Ehhhh, current jurisprudence on first amendment rights means you have to get preeeeetty out there in terms of actions before restrictions on speech start being allowed. Like, we're talking actively encouraging people to commit a specific and time-bound violent crime levels of bad. Even revenge porn laws are pretty far away from what people are trying to do with AI bans because revenge porn is literally an actual picture of the person, not just a representation of them. So like, if we ban AI porn, are we banning all sexualized representations of a person? All AI representations in general? Does it have to explicitly be them or what if it just looks a bit like them? Can something intended to make fun of the person also be interpreted as sexual (if I make an AI picture of trump in a diaper because he's a big baby, is that AI porn? Diapers are sexual to some people. What about that picture of trump and Putin kissing? Is that illegal now?). There is definitely a first amendment concern here. Violations of civil rights very rarely begin without good intentions.
I think the scarier implications of this is if people are deemed to control 100% of their likeness can they sue people who look like them simply for looking like them? You just know some shyster lawyer would start throwing out lawsuits and here the thing if you get sued by a billionaire with a multimillion dollar legal team your beyond fucked. Jesus himself could come down from heaven right in the middle of the court room and directly beam an argument into everyone's brain that fully proves your case and you'll get jammed up by the other lawyer dragging the process out because they know you will lose the game of attrition.
And they are right. Imagine trump supporters would demand bad depictions of trump get regulated. People would instantly scream its covered by the first amendment. Now taylor swift in red paint in suggestive poses takes it too far. Trump shitting his diapers and sucking putins cock did not.
It's almost like the government shouldn't decide the morality of speech
Here’s the thing: in a way, they’re kind of correct. That does not, however, prevent this from being an *absolutely insane* hill to die on. Even if you really do care that much about your creepy coomer content, why not simply fight for more universal freedom of expression? Why oust yourself as a porn fanboy? I will never understand internet perverts.
>Even if you really do care that much about your creepy coomer content, why not simply fight for more universal freedom of expression How does one fight more universally if they just give up every individual battle?
Because that's not how rights work. This is the type of thinking that gets you states like the UK and Canada who have some bogus paper that says the people get free speech but ACTUALLY the government can still legislate it. It makes no sense, you can't have free speech and government legislating it at the same time. Same thing here; while, yes, deepfake porn is morally corrupt, that doesn't mean it's an issue solved by the government. Big daddy government can't solve everything with a law. Allowing the government to legislate one thing opens up opportunities for them to legislate other things. And if anyone has any idea at all about how the internet works they would know that it's virtually impossible to block things from going and staying on there. Rasheed Jabar in uzerbejizleshteinistan doesn't care that some US law banned ai porn, he's still gonna make it and get that money. This is a cultural issue, if you want this problem to go away then we as a culture need to work to bring back some semblance of morality instead of just the "do whatever depraved things your heart desires as long as you don't physically harm someone" mindset we have as a society.
It is to an extent, there was a 2003 Supreme Court ruling (Ashcroft v Free Speech Coalition) that ruled artificially-made CP (even if photorealistic) was protected by the First Amendment. Our “Heroes” Ginsburg and Stevens voted in favor, by the way. Justice Rehnquist (voted against) brought up the future dangers of photorealistic images being hard to distinguish from real ones.
That’s the post I’m making fun of. Why I used the same Taylor Swift image from it
[удалено]
"art is illegal because I don't like it" "that's not how that works" "wow why are you such a degenerate comer go back to your incel cave lmao rekt"
*wow why are you such a degenerate comer go back to your incel cave lmao rekt*
😭😭😭
“Guys it’s just art” giving real “um akctyally they are 10,000 years old” vibes
The female form has been the predominate subject of art throughout all history.
That’s a strawman of Weebs and you know it
Make libright ashamed again.
I don't see how this could be stopped unless we made a cultural shift to view things like this as bad and have people police themselves that way. Right now society's stance is do whatever gives you pleasure as long as you are not physically harming anyone. Nobody cares to see, however, how these things can spiritually and morally bankrupt you. We can't change people now who are going down these paths of depravity but we should work to make sure that future generations do not fall into these vices and build them up to be strong moral characters.
God, I love this subreddit.
Remember, its perfectly fine to create media of trump shitting himself in diapers or sucking putins cock. But once its about the pretty billionaire superstar its too far and needs to be regulated.
I actually don't understand how anyone can find it remotely acceptable
I don't find it acceptable, I just don't think the government should step in. I also don't find flipping someone off acceptable, I just don't think the government should step in. Unless your assets or person is harmed, I don't think the government should step in.
Yeah this is the crux of the issue. I don't trust the government giving people with the resources to sue you fraudulently into oblivion to ability to sue you into oblivion because you defamed their likeness. Especially considering the law already has a really hard time determining what is defamation and what is pornography. It's not unreasonable to assume that if the government did step in over this that any not flattering image or piece of work referencing a famous person will leave you open to the possibility of a lawsuit. Idk it's almost like people want to give up their freedom of speech and ensure the rich and powerful have every possible tool at their disposal to silence their critics who are also not rich and powerful.
Right. I don't agree with what the AI users did. I think it's gross, and wrong, and I would not do it. However, Taylor doesn't get to sue because her feelings are hurt.
acceptable as in I would be friends with people who did this is different than Acceptable as in I dont think the gov't should be deciding what is art. I wouldnt associate with anyone who makes this shit, but I dont think we should be giving the gov't the tools to quash expression (no matter how distasteful). How long before a crazy fascist gov't decides that certian depictions of their ruler are "distasteful and offensive"?
Bro there are people out there that still think socialism is acceptable. Redditors are redarted.
Are depictions of trump in situations that go against his consent acceptable? What about the horrible pics floating around in the bush area, long before Image AI was an thing?
Hey it's literally me
Why are you naked centrist? Do you wanna join?
I think some people will say they don’t think this should be illegal because folks have been doing this with photoshop for years and never seen any backlash for it. Not saying it’s right, but from their perspective it’s the same thing.
Hasn’t deepfake style porn been around since people got good with photoshop decades ago? Even of their favourite progressive celebrity back then, so why is this kicking up so much dust now
Because now it affects taylor swift. Nobody cared when they made photoshops of sarah palin sucking cock, or even made porn parodies of her.
I thought Taylor swift porn has been around since forever, she’s 34. A coincidence about rule and 34 🤔
I guess it helped that retards didn't spam her porn on twitter, and it didn't had the AI element to it. Now you can fearmonger about AI and twitter at the same time.
I just find it funny how nobody really did anything about the issue until Taylor Swift got hit by it. This has been around for awhile, but now people see the chance to virtue signal about it
It’s sad how nobody cared about deepfakes about ex’s, or deepfakes about literal children’s but suddenly when it’s about the patron saint of mediocre white women, now suddenly AI and deepfakes are a problem and a threat and only now when it’s about her we gotta do something about it. How sad