68
Taylor Swift AI images prompt US bill to tackle nonconsensual, sexual deepfakes
(www.theguardian.com)
this post was submitted on 31 Jan 2024
68 points (92.5% liked)
Technology
59249 readers
3974 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Unfortunate that it took a famous person being a victim of this before action started to be taken.
That said, will this do anything to help? People are still going to do it regardless.
In a weird way, could this tech not be a good thing? There are unfortunately plenty of stories of young people in particular becoming extremely stressed to the point of harming themselves over leaks of their nudes.
If in the future, they can be trivially dismissed as being easily-generated deepfakes (regardless of whether they actually are), would that not lessen the harm considerably? Would it not recalibrate our brains to care about it less?
I don't know the answers to any of this. We're going into uncharted territory.
https://lemmy.zip/comment/6691303
I actually argued similarly over here. This fake outrage because a celebrity was targeted serves nobody. Fakes will just get better, and legislation will always be on the back foot.
I wonder what it will do to the stress levels of parents, knowing that their kid can be on the hook for $150k if they share some fake. Would any liability insurance cover this?
Would they? Last year a woman was awarded $1.2b in damages after her ex boyfriend distributed revenge porn.
How many people would hit that retweet button, if they knew it might lead to damages on that scale? Presumably her ex-boyfriend went bankrupt and lost everything he owned, having to give all of it to her (and her lawyers).
Sure, some people would still take that risk but not very many. And at least the victims would get a nice pay day out of it.
Yes.
People break copyright and other IP laws all the time, for example.
Shit, torrenting a film carries a 10 year max prison sentence where I am. It doesn't stop anybody.
Speeding fines can be absolutely huge. People still speed. Etc.
A law like this is virtually impossible to enforce, the crime in question is getting easier and easier to trivially commit, and thus the law likely won't do much.
And btw that case you linked is a hell of a lot more than someone retweeting or upvoting a deepfake.
It covers someone constantly uploading porn of a partner and blackmailing them (even days before the court case), impersonating her online, doxxing her, and sending porn of her to her family members.
It also covers him illegally using her bank account to pay his bills and using her name and information to apply for loans in her name.
That case is a very, very, very, very different situation to someone making a Taylor Swift deepfake.
So different that it calls into question whether you even read past the headline.