> What's creepy is the very real world that we're approaching where anyone can create porn of anyone else given a few pictures without their consent.
Why is that a problem, exactly?
> That can cause all sorts of lasting psychological harm and other societal negative consequences.
Like what? To me this sounds like a problem with how some people want to have absolute control over what others do and want everyone else to play along. That's what I find really creepy.
Someone wants to generate porn of me fucking a donkey? Let them. They already could do that with ms-paint and I don't get magically harmed if they do.
This reminds me of the old saying: "Sticks and stones may break my bones, but AI-generated/photoshopped/glued-together pictures of me fucking a donkey will never hurt me" :)
Revenge porn, rumors, and defamation are already huge problems in society. Being able to generate such things on demand with AI models will make it significantly worse.
To play devil's advocate being able to generate this kind of content on demand with AI may actually make things significantly worse.
The reason why revenge porn, rumours, and defamation are all possible online is because there's a level of plausibility to these things -- especially revenge porn.
Now that plausibility goes out the window because of AI generated content. Someone posts your actual nudes? Give a nervous laugh and say that AI made them.
Someone says they heard a rumour about you and asks if it's true? Say 'don't believe everything you read on the internet, you know they have AI that writes anything you want now, right?"
Perhaps, but there comes a point where the technology is out there whether we like it or not. We should criminalize bad uses, not engage in some futile attempt to try to stuff the proverbial cat back in the bag
Don't let perfection be the enemy of good. Anyone with a basic machine shop can modify an AR15 for fully automatic fire, and a bump stock can be fabricated even easier. That doesn't mean we should just give up and make these things legal and easily accessible to everyone.
An automatic rifle has almost no positive use to it. This software is not like that and more like something that makes everyone better at a skill, uniformly raising the artistic talent floor. The large majority benefit but some would use their new earned skill for bad. It would be like denying literacy and the printing press because there will always be some people who use it to write very bad distressing things, manipulate more easily en masse and spread misinformation.
They're not refusing to distribute the software, they're restricting it for NSFW uses, of which the danger is more significant than any positive uses - much like automatic fire.
"restricting it for NSFW", according to whose standard? "which the danger", like what?
I'm glad this technology is finally out in the open where people like you no longer have a say in how it is used. The sooner people accept its existence (like they have with Photoshop), the better off and healthier we'll be as a society.
Do you really need someone to spell out to you why being able to create realistic-looking porn of anyone might lead to some issues...?
>Someone wants to generate porn of me fucking a donkey? Let them. They already could do that with ms-paint and I don't get magically harmed if they do.
What an absolutely wild take. Do you expect this line of thinking to be convincing when you're comparing AI-generated images to what someone can whip together in MS Paint? Come on. You, me, and everyone else reading here knows that's not even close to a valid comparison.
> Do you really need someone to spell out to you why being able to create realistic-looking porn of anyone might lead to some issues...?
Yes. I honestly have no
> What an absolutely wild take. Do you expect this line of thinking to be convincing when you're comparing AI-generated images to what someone can whip together in MS Paint? Come on. You, me, and everyone else reading here knows that's not even close to a valid comparison.
Wild or not, my point stands. With minimal skills, you can photoshop anyone's face on any pornographic image out there. It's a spot on comparison.
The proverb describes a state of mind one should aspire to. "Words will never hurt me" not because saying mean things can never do harm (it obviously can), but because I make an effort to control my emotions and reactions. Just as physical health is improved by a nutritious diet and regular exercise, mental health is improved by proper habits of mind.
I agree. Just because we have more advanced diagnosis and detection tools these days doesn't mean everything has to be a problem. The internet has really shaken up social norms and signaling and the kids are the first ones to enter the new world. I believe once we have a generation of fully formed 30-50 year olds who grew up with this strange social media, then we'll have the proper understandings and social knowledge to handle it well. Kinda like how parents these days can attempt to relate to their kids in high school. We need the elder wisdom there.
But I do believe that right now we're kinda off track. We almost venerate the act of being hurt. Everyone likes attention and nothing gets such protection by certain classes as having been offended or wronged by some other class. Social signals are currently built to display virtue and so people will go out of their way to display their support of the wronged. I _do_ believe that this is the correct direction to move from where we were, but I think it's gone a little too far and needs time to rebound.
Being a victim is the fastest way to go from zero to hero (reach millions of people) these days and it's also seemingly the least likely way to backfire. People are much more hesitant to bring up the wrongs of someone who's currently being defended for fear of ending up being placed in the out group and ostracized from the signaling group.
This all contributes to a social custom of looking to be wronged, so that you may point out the evil of the person/generation/world. However, people aren't idiots and can _sometimes_ tell if you're just faking for clout. This leads to a feedback loop of needing to be really hurt, seeing other people be really hurt, believing your really hurt, and finally internalizing that pain and trauma. Things do hurt, bad words are called bad for a reason. Society might be better if we were all nice. But every bad word and every microaggression does not need to become such a large roadblock to personal freedom. People are chaining themselves to the road with this stuff. Dieing on hills that require them to have been personally wronged, using their own pain as a way to shut down criticism. Yes, people hurt, and things can be bad. But it's also entirely possible to see something hurtful and continue life without it hurting you. It's 100% doable to actually not be hurt, not just ignore it, but to construct a self esteem and understanding that allows you to not be shanked by every half difficult social interaction that occurs.
Mental health awareness is good. But social signals lead individuals to believing they must be hurt to be a part of the in group. Virtue through suffering is an incredibly effective signaling mechanism
Im not saying you should broadcast your woes to the world for fake internet points. Just that people should be ok with having a bad day sometimes and that people who think they are too "strong" to ever be sad, usually are the most screwed up mentally.
Why is that a problem, exactly?
> That can cause all sorts of lasting psychological harm and other societal negative consequences.
Like what? To me this sounds like a problem with how some people want to have absolute control over what others do and want everyone else to play along. That's what I find really creepy.
Someone wants to generate porn of me fucking a donkey? Let them. They already could do that with ms-paint and I don't get magically harmed if they do.
This reminds me of the old saying: "Sticks and stones may break my bones, but AI-generated/photoshopped/glued-together pictures of me fucking a donkey will never hurt me" :)