Skip to content

Kids are making deepfakes of each other, and laws aren’t keeping up

Technology
165 77 2
  • probably because there's a rapist in the white house.

    To add to that. I live in a red area and since the election I’ve been cat called much more. And it’s weird too, cus I’m middle aged…. I thought I’d finally disappear…

  • To add to that. I live in a red area and since the election I’ve been cat called much more. And it’s weird too, cus I’m middle aged…. I thought I’d finally disappear…

    the toxic manosphere/blogosphere/whatever it's called has done so much lifelong damage

  • Punishment for an adult man doing this: Prison

    Punishment for a 13 year old by doing this: Publish his browsing and search history in the school newsletter.

    13 year old: “I'll just take the death penalty, thanks."

  • Hm. I wasn’t expecting the pro-child porn argument. All I can say is that’s absolutely legally and morally CSAM, and you’re fuckin nasty. Oof. Not really gonna bother with the rest because, well, yikes.

    Hey, it's OK to say you just don't have any counter-argument instead of making blatantly false characterisations.

  • Cheers for the explanation, had no idea that's how it works.

    So it's even worse than @danciestlobster@lemmy.zip thinks, the person creating the deep fake has to have access to CP then if they want to deepfake it!

    AI can generate images of things that don't even exist. If it knows what porn looks like and what a child looks like, it can combine those concepts.

  • I'm fairly well versed in tech and home labbing. I've never heard of tools that do this, generate images, etc. Not good ones anyhow. I could use those type of generation for business marketing to develop business cards, marketing materials. NOT FOR PEOPLE GENERATION. Anyone have a list of the best tools? GPT sucks at doing this I've tried.

    Take a look at InvokeAI.

  • Spoken like someone who hasn't been around women.

    You mean like a nerd who reads too much?

  • Suppose I'm a teenager attracted to people my age. Or suppose I'm medically a pedophile, which is not a crime, and then I would need that.

    In any case, for legal and moral purposes "why would you want" should be answered only with "not your concern, go eat shit and die".

    I feel like you didn't read my comment thoroughly enough. I said it can constitue CSAM. There is a surprising amount of leewat for teenagers of course.

    But no, I'm not gonna let you get away that easily. I want to know the why you think it's morally okay for an adult to draw sexually explicit images of children. Please, tell me how that's okay?

  • I feel like you didn't read my comment thoroughly enough. I said it can constitue CSAM. There is a surprising amount of leewat for teenagers of course.

    But no, I'm not gonna let you get away that easily. I want to know the why you think it's morally okay for an adult to draw sexually explicit images of children. Please, tell me how that's okay?

    Because morally it's not your fucking concern what others are doing in supposed privacy of their personal spaces.

    It seems to be a very obvious thing your nose doesn't belong there and you shouldn't stick it there.

    But no, I’m not gonna let you get away that easily.

    I don't need any getting away from you, you're nothing.

  • Yes, absolutely. But with recognition that a thirteen year old kid isn't a predator but a horny little kid. I'll let others determine what that punishment is, but I don't believe it's prison. Community service maybe. Written apology. Stuff like that. Second offense, ok, we're ratcheting up the punishment, but still not adult prison.

    In a properly functioning world, this could easily be coupled with particular education on power dynamics and a lesson on consent, giving proper attention to why this might be more harmful to get than to him.

    Of course, – so long as we're in this hypothetical world – you'd just have that kind of education be a part of sex ed. or the like for all students, to begin with, but, as we're in this world and that's Louisiana…

  • Its not a matter of feeling ashamed, its a matter of literally feeling like your value to the world is dictated by your role in the sexualities of heterosexual boys and men. It is feeling like your own body doesnt belong to you but can be freely claimed by others. It is losing trust in all your male friends and peers, because it feels like without you knowing they’ve already decided that you’re a sexual experience for them.

    Why is it these things? Why does someone doing something with something which is not your body make it feel like your body doesn't belong to you? Why does it not instead make it feel like images of your body don't belong to you? Several of these things could equally be used to describe the situation when someone is fantasised about without their knowledge - why is that different?
    In Germany there's a legal concept called "right to one's own image" but there isn't in many other countries, and besides, what you're describing goes beyond this.

    My thinking behind these questions is that I cannot see anything inherent, anything necessary about the creation of fake sexual images of someone which leads to these harms, and that instead there is an aspect of our society which very explicitly punishes and shames people - woman far more so than men - for being in this situation, and that without that, we would be having a very different conversation.

    Starting from the position that the harm is in the creation of the images is like starting from the position that the harm of rape is in "defiling" the person raped. Rape isn't wrong because it makes you worthless to society - society is wrong for devaluing rape victims. Society is wrong for devaluing and shaming those who have fake images made of them.

    We do know the harm of this kind of sexualization. Women and girls have been talking about it for generations. This isnt new, just a new streamlined way to spread it. It should be illegal.

    Can you be more explicit about what it's the same as?

    The sexualization of women and girls is pervasive across literally every level of western culture. What do you think the purpose is of the victims head and face being in the image? Do you believe that it plays an incidental and unrelated role? Do you believe that finding out that, there is an entire group of people who you thought were your friends but are in actuality taking pictures of your head and masturbating to the idea of you performing sex acts for them using alorthimically derived likenesses of your naked body, has no psychological consequences for you whatsoever? I'm just talking about it and it makes me want to throw up. It is a fucking nightmare. This is not normal. This is not creating a healthy relationship with sexuality and it is enforcing a view of women and their bodies existing for the gratification of men.

    You continuously attempt to extrapolate some very bizarre metaphors about this that are not at all applicable. This scenario is horrifying. Teenage girls should not be subject to scenarios like this. It is sexual exploitation. It is dehumanization. It promotes misogynistic views of women. This is NOT a matter of sexual liberation. Youre essentially saying that men and boys can't be expected to treat girls and women as actual people and instead must be allowed to turn their friends and peers into fetishized media content they can share amongst each other. Thats fucking disgusting. The longer you talk the more you start to sound like an incel. I'm not saying you are one, but this is the kind of behavior that they defend.

  • Because morally it's not your fucking concern what others are doing in supposed privacy of their personal spaces.

    It seems to be a very obvious thing your nose doesn't belong there and you shouldn't stick it there.

    But no, I’m not gonna let you get away that easily.

    I don't need any getting away from you, you're nothing.

    No. That's not a good enough excuse to potentially be abusing children.

    I can't think of a single good reason to draw those kinds of things. Like at all. Please, give me a single good reason.

  • The sexualization of women and girls is pervasive across literally every level of western culture. What do you think the purpose is of the victims head and face being in the image? Do you believe that it plays an incidental and unrelated role? Do you believe that finding out that, there is an entire group of people who you thought were your friends but are in actuality taking pictures of your head and masturbating to the idea of you performing sex acts for them using alorthimically derived likenesses of your naked body, has no psychological consequences for you whatsoever? I'm just talking about it and it makes me want to throw up. It is a fucking nightmare. This is not normal. This is not creating a healthy relationship with sexuality and it is enforcing a view of women and their bodies existing for the gratification of men.

    You continuously attempt to extrapolate some very bizarre metaphors about this that are not at all applicable. This scenario is horrifying. Teenage girls should not be subject to scenarios like this. It is sexual exploitation. It is dehumanization. It promotes misogynistic views of women. This is NOT a matter of sexual liberation. Youre essentially saying that men and boys can't be expected to treat girls and women as actual people and instead must be allowed to turn their friends and peers into fetishized media content they can share amongst each other. Thats fucking disgusting. The longer you talk the more you start to sound like an incel. I'm not saying you are one, but this is the kind of behavior that they defend.

    Do you believe that finding out that, there is an entire group of people who you thought were your friends but are in actuality taking pictures of your head and masturbating to the idea of you performing sex acts for them using alorthimically derived likenesses of your naked body, has no psychological consequences for you whatsoever?

    Do you think the consequences of finding out are significantly different than finding out they're doing it in their imagination? If so, why?

    Youre essentially saying that men and boys can’t be expected to treat girls and women as actual people and instead must be allowed to turn their friends and peers into fetishized media content they can share amongst each other.

    And, just to be clear, by this you mean the stuff with pictures, not talking or thinking about them? Because, again, the words "media content" just don't seem to be key to any harm being done.

    Your approach is consistently to say that "this is harmful, this is disgusting", but not to say why. Likewise you say that the "metaphors are not at all applicable" but you don't say at all what the important difference is between "people who you thought were your friends but are in actuality taking pictures of your head and masturbating to the idea of you performing sex acts for them using alorthimically derived likenesses of your naked body" and "people who you thought were your friends but are in actuality imagining your head and masturbating to the idea of you performing sex acts for them using imagined likenesses of your naked body". Both acts are sexualisation, both are done without consent, both could cause poor treatment by the people doing it.

    I see two possiblities - either you see this as so obviously and fundamentally wrong you don't have a way of describing way, or you know that the two scenarios are fundamentally similar but know that the idea of thought-crime is unsustainable.

    Finally it's necessary to address the gendered way you're talking about this. While obviously there is a huge discrepancy in male perpetrators and female victims of sexual abuse and crimes, it makes it sound like you think this is only a problem because, or when, it affects women and girls. You should probably think about that, because for years we've been making deserved progress at making things gender-neutral and I doubt you'd accept this kind of thing in other areas.

  • No. That's not a good enough excuse to potentially be abusing children.

    I can't think of a single good reason to draw those kinds of things. Like at all. Please, give me a single good reason.

    No. That’s not a good enough excuse to potentially be abusing children.

    It's good enough for the person whose opinion counts, your doesn't. And there's no such potential.

    I can’t think of a single good reason to draw those kinds of things. Like at all.

    Too bad.

    Please, give me a single good reason.

    To reinforce that your opinion doesn't count is in itself a good reason. The best of them all really.

  • In general, even up here in woke-ville, punishments have gotten a lot more strict for kids. There’s a lot more involvement of police, courts, jail. As a parent it causes me a lot of anxiety - whatever happened to school being a “sandbox” where a kid can make mistakes without adult consequences, without ruining their lives? Did that ever exist?

    it existed if society liked you enough.

    fascists just have a habit of tightening that belt smaller and smaller, is what’s going on.

  • Schools and lawmakers are grappling with how to address a new form of peer-on-peer image-based sexual abuse that disproportionately targets girls.

    Maybe let's assume all digital images are fake and go back to painting. Wait... what if children start painting deepfakes ?

  • No. That’s not a good enough excuse to potentially be abusing children.

    It's good enough for the person whose opinion counts, your doesn't. And there's no such potential.

    I can’t think of a single good reason to draw those kinds of things. Like at all.

    Too bad.

    Please, give me a single good reason.

    To reinforce that your opinion doesn't count is in itself a good reason. The best of them all really.

    Okay so you have no reason. Which is because having sexually explicit images, drawn or otherwise, is gross and weird and disturbing. And the fact that you are continually doubling down shows me that you likely need your hard drives and notebooks checked.

    Please don't respond again unless you are telling me what country you are from so I can report you to the appropriate authorities.

  • Okay so you have no reason. Which is because having sexually explicit images, drawn or otherwise, is gross and weird and disturbing. And the fact that you are continually doubling down shows me that you likely need your hard drives and notebooks checked.

    Please don't respond again unless you are telling me what country you are from so I can report you to the appropriate authorities.

    People don't need reasons to do things gross or disturbing or whatever for you in their own space.

    And the fact that you are continually doubling down shows me that you likely need your hard drives and notebooks checked.

    Thankfully that's not your concern, and would get you in jail if you tried to do that yourself. Also I'm too lazy for my porn habits to be secret enough, LOL.

    Please don’t respond again unless you are telling me what country you are from so I can report you to the appropriate authorities.

    I don't think you understand. You're the fiend here. The kind of obnoxious shit that thinks it's in their right to watch after others' morality.

    I wonder, what if I'd try to report you and someone would follow through (unlikely, of course, without anything specific to report), hypothetically, which instances of stalking and privacy violations they'd find?

    You really seem the kind.

  • Do you believe that finding out that, there is an entire group of people who you thought were your friends but are in actuality taking pictures of your head and masturbating to the idea of you performing sex acts for them using alorthimically derived likenesses of your naked body, has no psychological consequences for you whatsoever?

    Do you think the consequences of finding out are significantly different than finding out they're doing it in their imagination? If so, why?

    Youre essentially saying that men and boys can’t be expected to treat girls and women as actual people and instead must be allowed to turn their friends and peers into fetishized media content they can share amongst each other.

    And, just to be clear, by this you mean the stuff with pictures, not talking or thinking about them? Because, again, the words "media content" just don't seem to be key to any harm being done.

    Your approach is consistently to say that "this is harmful, this is disgusting", but not to say why. Likewise you say that the "metaphors are not at all applicable" but you don't say at all what the important difference is between "people who you thought were your friends but are in actuality taking pictures of your head and masturbating to the idea of you performing sex acts for them using alorthimically derived likenesses of your naked body" and "people who you thought were your friends but are in actuality imagining your head and masturbating to the idea of you performing sex acts for them using imagined likenesses of your naked body". Both acts are sexualisation, both are done without consent, both could cause poor treatment by the people doing it.

    I see two possiblities - either you see this as so obviously and fundamentally wrong you don't have a way of describing way, or you know that the two scenarios are fundamentally similar but know that the idea of thought-crime is unsustainable.

    Finally it's necessary to address the gendered way you're talking about this. While obviously there is a huge discrepancy in male perpetrators and female victims of sexual abuse and crimes, it makes it sound like you think this is only a problem because, or when, it affects women and girls. You should probably think about that, because for years we've been making deserved progress at making things gender-neutral and I doubt you'd accept this kind of thing in other areas.

    There is an institution in society specifically designed to strip women of their autonomy, reduce them down to their sexual appeal to men, and proliferate the notions of their inherent submission to men. This simply does not exist the other way. This will not be a major problem for boys, teenage girls are not creating fucking AI porn rings with pictures of boys from their classes. That isnt happening. Will someone do it? Almost certainly. Is it a systemic issue? No. Men's bodies are not attacked institutionally in this way.

    And youre still trying to equate imagination with physical tangible media. And to be clear, if several of my friends said they were collectively beating off to the idea of me naked, I would be horrified and disgusted. The overwhelming majority of people would. Again, they've taken you an actual person they know and are friends with, and have turned you into a sexual goal to be attained. It is invasive, exploitative, and above all else dehumanizing. Yeah if even one of my friends told me he jerked off to the thought of me naked I would never see him the same way again and would stop being friends with him. If I was a teenager it would probably fuck me up pretty bad to know that someone who I thought was my friend just saw me as a collection of sexual body parts with a face attached. If I found that a whole group of boys, some who i might not even know, were sharing AI generated porn with my face it would be severely psychologically traumatizing and probably shake my trust in men and boys for the rest of my life. This isn't a fucking game. Youre acting like this is normal, its NOT FUCKING NORMAL. Photoshopping a girl in your classes face onto a nude body and sharing it with a group of boys is NOT NORMAL. That is severely disturbed behavior. That shows a complete malfunction in your empathy. It does if thats your imagination too. And finding that out, that somebody has done that, is absolutely repulsive.

    And no I find it perfectly sustainable. We have no means by which to detect pedophiles by their thoughts. But pedophilic thoughts are still wrong and are not something we tolerate people expressing. Creating CSAM is still illegal, whether or not the child is aware such content is being created of them. They cant consent to that as they are children. This is the same. No we cant fucking read people's thoughts and punish them for them. Having thoughts like that is absolutely a sign of some obsessive tendencies and already forming devaluation of women and girls and reduction of them to their bodies, but the correct thing is for them to receive counseling and proper education about sex and relationships. Creating, sharing and distributing AI generated porn of someone is so fundamentally different from that I have to think you have a fundamental misunderstanding about what an image is. This isnt a fucking thought. These boys and men can do whatever they want with this pornography they've made of you, can send it to whoever they want and share it as far and wide as they want. They have literally created porn of you without your consent. And for teenage girls this is a whole other level of fucked up. This is being used to produce CSAM. They cannot consent to this. It is a provable act of violation of women and girls. This should be illegal and should be treated extremely seriously when teenage boys are found to have done it.

    You all say youre feminists until someone comes after your fucked up sexualities and your porn addictions. Always the same.

  • The author of those comments wrote a few times what in their opinion happens in the heads of others and how that should be prevented or something.

    Can you please stop interpreting my words exactly the way you like? That's not worth a gram of horse shit.

    Yes I can, moreso after your clarification. I must have misread it the first time. Sorry.

  • 31 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • 139 Stimmen
    28 Beiträge
    54 Aufrufe
    D
    Lmao it hasn't even been a year under Trump. Calm your titties
  • 55 Stimmen
    4 Beiträge
    9 Aufrufe
    M
    Tragedy of the commons? Everyone wants to use it, no one wants to put forward the resources to maintain it.
  • 367 Stimmen
    27 Beiträge
    30 Aufrufe
    P
    They're like "Wahhh we need to hit 3.5% and then the fascist dictator will totally resign!" and then Trump is like "Oooo my delicate little feefees, oh well, here comes my Gestapo!" while the 50501 protest marshalls chant "We did it! We don't need crushing violence to make a change!" while completely ignoring that the NKD protests accomplished literally nothing.
  • Super Human In Transit - Living

    Technology technology
    1
    2
    0 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    9 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • 40 Stimmen
    10 Beiträge
    21 Aufrufe
    T
    Clearly the author doesn't understand how capitalism works. If Apple can pick you up by the neck, turn you upside down, and shake whatever extra money it can from you then it absolutely will do so. The problem is that one indie developer doesn't have any power over Apple... so they can go fuck themselves. The developer is granted the opportunity to grovel at the feet of their betters (richers) and pray that they are allowed to keep enough of their own crop to survive the winter. If they don't survive... then some other dev will probably jump at the chance to take part in the "free market" and demonstrate their worth.
  • 24 Stimmen
    14 Beiträge
    21 Aufrufe
    S
    I think you're missing some key points. Any file hosting service, no matter what, will have to deal with CSAM as long as people are able to upload to it. No matter what. This is an inescapable fact of hosting and the internet in general. Because CSAM is so ubiquitous and constant, one can only do so much to moderate any services, whether they're a large corporation are someone with a server in their closet. All of the larger platforms like 'meta', google, etc., mostly outsource that moderation to workers in developing countries so they don't have to also provide mental health counselling, but that's another story. The reason they own their own hardware is because the hosting services can and will disable your account and take down your servers if there's even a whiff of CSAM. Since it's a constant threat, it's better to own your own hardware and host everything from your closet so you don't have to eat the downtime and wait for some poor bastard in Nigeria to look through your logs and reinstate your account (not sure how that works exactly though).
  • Microsoft's AI Secretly Copying All Your Private Messages

    Technology technology
    4
    1
    0 Stimmen
    4 Beiträge
    17 Aufrufe
    S
    Forgive me for not explaining better. Here are the terms potentially needing explanation. Provisioning in this case is initial system setup, the kind of stuff you would do manually after a fresh install, but usually implies a regimented and repeatable process. Virtual Machine (VM) snapshots are like a save state in a game, and are often used to reset a virtual machine to a particular known-working condition. Preboot Execution Environment (PXE, aka ‘network boot’) is a network adapter feature that lets you boot a physical machine from a hosted network image rather than the usual installation on locally attached storage. It’s probably tucked away in your BIOS settings, but many computers have the feature since it’s a common requirement in commercial deployments. As with the VM snapshot described above, a PXE image is typically a known-working state that resets on each boot. Non-virtualized means not using hardware virtualization, and I meant specifically not running inside a virtual machine. Local-only means without a network or just not booting from a network-hosted image. Telemetry refers to data collecting functionality. Most software has it. Windows has a lot. Telemetry isn’t necessarily bad since it can, for example, help reveal and resolve bugs and usability problems, but it is easily (and has often been) abused by data-hungry corporations like MS, so disabling it is an advisable precaution. MS = Microsoft OSS = Open Source Software Group policies are administrative settings in Windows that control standards (for stuff like security, power management, licensing, file system and settings access, etc.) for user groups on a machine or network. Most users stick with the defaults but you can edit these yourself for a greater degree of control. Docker lets you run software inside “containers” to isolate them from the rest of the environment, exposing and/or virtualizing just the resources they need to run, and Compose is a related tool for defining one or more of these containers, how they interact, etc. To my knowledge there is no one-to-one equivalent for Windows. Obviously, many of these concepts relate to IT work, as are the use-cases I had in mind, but the software is simple enough for the average user if you just pick one of the premade playbooks. (The Atlas playbook is popular among gamers, for example.) Edit: added explanations for docker and telemetry