Technology

59402 readers

3090 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

341

‘IRL Fakes:’ Where People Pay for AI-Generated Porn of Normal People (www.404media.co)

submitted 7 months ago by Stopthatgirl7@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world

193 comments fedilink hide all child comments

A Telegram user who advertises their services on Twitter will create an AI-generated pornographic image of anyone in the world for as little as $10 if users send them pictures of that person. Like many other Telegram communities and users producing nonconsensual AI-generated sexual images, this user creates fake nude images of celebrities, including images of minors in swimsuits, but is particularly notable because it plainly and openly shows one of the most severe harms of generative AI tools: easily creating nonconsensual pornography of ordinary people.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] guyrocket@kbin.social 87 points 7 months ago (46 children)

This is not new. People have been Photoshopping this kind of thing since before there was Photoshop. Why "AI" being involved matters is beyond me. The result is the same: fake porn/nudes.

And all the hand wringing in the world about it being non consensual will not stop it. The cat has been out of the bag for a long time.

I think we all need to shift to not believing what we see. It is counterintuitive, but also the new normal.

[–] dysprosium@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Exactly this. And rather believe cryptographically sighed images by comparing hashes with the one supplied by the owner. Then it's rather a question of trusting a specific source for a specific kind of content. A news photo of the war in Ukraine by the BBC? Check hash on their site. Their reputation is fini if a false image has been found.

[–] T156@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

At the same time, that does introduce an additional layer of work. Most people aren't going to do that just for the extra work that it would involve, in much the same way that people today won't track down an image back down to the original source, but usually just go by the one that they saw.

Especially for people who aren't so cryptographically or technologically inclined that they know what a hash is, where to find one, and how to compare it (without just opening them both and checking personally).

[–] dysprosium@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 7 months ago

Sure but that's no problem if software would do that automatically for users of big (news) sites. Browsers on desktop and apps on phones.

load more comments (43 replies)