Skip to content

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

Technology
172 77 1.3k
  • I hope it might lead to a situation of dirty pics/vids not being a problem for the people in it any more, as it could be a deepfake. Like there were cases where a surfacing dirty pic was used for blackmail, ruined someones career or got them kicked out of some comittee, but since it could be fabrication now, I hope this will beva thing of the past, soon.

    That could be a socially healthy place to end up at. I don't see it anytime soon though. Just look at the other response I got.

  • AI can do penises just fine though, there's just no market demand for it so quick and easy deep fake sites are focused on female bodies.

    But I disagree with this anyway, this will be the "bullied kid brings a knife to class" of AI.

    You're disagreeing with my unserious suggestion? I just... okay. No. Micropenises aren't a solution. I just don't think there is one.

    If you want to disagree with that, let's hear it. I have 15 and 13 year old daughters. Anyone can buy a $400 computer, install Linux, install AI, and undress people all day long. There is no legal restraint capable of stopping that, only punishing it.

    Shut down model distribution and it'll move to torrent. Put the kids in the legal system and they are going to face lifelong consequences for 12-year-old assholery. (To be fair, victims often face long repercussions for being targeted, but that's not imposed by the state which demands a higher standard.) Hold parents accountable and it will disproportionately impact families who spend more hours working and can't supervise their kids 24/7.

    So I'm short on answers, but open to discussion.

  • Honestly I think we need to understand that this is no different to sticking a photo of someone's head on a porn magazine photo. It's not real. It's just less janky.

    I would categorise it as sexual harassment, not abuse. Still serious, but a different level

    Yes, finding out that your peers have been sharing deep fake pornography of you is absolutely fine and a normal thing for young girls to go through in school. No girls have ever killed themselves because of this exact sort of thing, surely. This definitely will not add in any way to the way women and girls are made to feel entirely disgustingly dehumanized by every man or boy in their lives. Groups of men and boys reducing them and their bodies down to vivid sexual fantasies that they can quickly generate photo realistic images of.

    If the person in the image is underaged then it should be classified as child pornography. If the woman who's photo is being used hasnt consented to this then it should be classified as sexual exploitation.

    Women and girls have faced degrees of this kind of sexual exploitation by men and boys since the latter half of the 20th century. But this is a severe escalation in that behavior. It should be illegal to do this and it should be prosecuted when and where it is found to occur.

  • Schools generally means it involves underage individuals, which makes any content using them csam. So in effect, the "AI" companies are generating a ton of csam and nobody is doing anything about it.

    Do deepfake explicit images created from a non-explicit image actually qualify as CSAM?

  • Disagree. Not CSAM when no abuse has taken place.

    That's my point.

    If someone put a camera in the girls’ locker room and distributed photos from that, would you consider it CSAM? No contact would have taken place so the kids would be unaware when they were photographed, is it still abuse?

    If so, how is the psychological effect of a convincing deepfake any different?

  • Lawmakers are grappling with how to address ...

    Just a reminder that the government is actively voting against regulations on AI, because obviously a lot of these people are pocketing lobbyist money

    Even in countries a lot less corrupt than the US this is an issue.

    Especially because the US government/companies doesn't do jack shit for people

  • Do deepfake explicit images created from a non-explicit image actually qualify as CSAM?

    Drawing a sexy cartoon that looks like an adult, with a caption that says "I'm 12", counts. So yeah, probably.

  • Yes, finding out that your peers have been sharing deep fake pornography of you is absolutely fine and a normal thing for young girls to go through in school. No girls have ever killed themselves because of this exact sort of thing, surely. This definitely will not add in any way to the way women and girls are made to feel entirely disgustingly dehumanized by every man or boy in their lives. Groups of men and boys reducing them and their bodies down to vivid sexual fantasies that they can quickly generate photo realistic images of.

    If the person in the image is underaged then it should be classified as child pornography. If the woman who's photo is being used hasnt consented to this then it should be classified as sexual exploitation.

    Women and girls have faced degrees of this kind of sexual exploitation by men and boys since the latter half of the 20th century. But this is a severe escalation in that behavior. It should be illegal to do this and it should be prosecuted when and where it is found to occur.

    Thank you. Focusing on the harm the victims is the right way to understand this issue. Too many people in here hunting for a semantic loophole.

  • If someone put a camera in the girls’ locker room and distributed photos from that, would you consider it CSAM? No contact would have taken place so the kids would be unaware when they were photographed, is it still abuse?

    If so, how is the psychological effect of a convincing deepfake any different?

    Taking secret nude pictures of someone is quite a bit different than....not taking nude pictures of them.

    It's not CSAM to put a picture of someone's face on an adult model and show it to your friend. It's certainly sexual harassment, but it isn't CSAM.

  • That could be a socially healthy place to end up at. I don't see it anytime soon though. Just look at the other response I got.

    Anyone with half a brain will certainly claim as much. Even if people don't fully believe it, it will blunt the most serious of social consequences.

  • You're disagreeing with my unserious suggestion? I just... okay. No. Micropenises aren't a solution. I just don't think there is one.

    If you want to disagree with that, let's hear it. I have 15 and 13 year old daughters. Anyone can buy a $400 computer, install Linux, install AI, and undress people all day long. There is no legal restraint capable of stopping that, only punishing it.

    Shut down model distribution and it'll move to torrent. Put the kids in the legal system and they are going to face lifelong consequences for 12-year-old assholery. (To be fair, victims often face long repercussions for being targeted, but that's not imposed by the state which demands a higher standard.) Hold parents accountable and it will disproportionately impact families who spend more hours working and can't supervise their kids 24/7.

    So I'm short on answers, but open to discussion.

    They may be little sociopaths, but they don’t run around murdering each other. Our culture hammers it into their brains that murder is wrong and they will be severely punished for it. We need to build a culture where little boys are afraid to distribute naked photos of their classmates. Where their friends will turn them in for fear of repercussions. You do that by treating it like a crime, not by saying “boys will be boys” and ignoring the issue.

    Treat it like a crime, and address separately the issue of children being tried as adults and facing lifelong consequences. The reforms needed to our juvenile justice system go beyond this particular crime.

  • Taking secret nude pictures of someone is quite a bit different than....not taking nude pictures of them.

    It's not CSAM to put a picture of someone's face on an adult model and show it to your friend. It's certainly sexual harassment, but it isn't CSAM.

    How is it different for the victim? What if they can’t tell if it’s a deepfake or a real photo of them?

  • How is it different for the victim? What if they can’t tell if it’s a deepfake or a real photo of them?

    It's absolutely sexual harassment.

    But, to your question: you can't just say something has underage nudity when the nudity is of an adult model. It's not CSAM.

  • Lawmakers are grappling with how to address ...

    Just a reminder that the government is actively voting against regulations on AI, because obviously a lot of these people are pocketing lobbyist money

    Oh I just assumed that every Conservative jerks off to kids

  • Yes, finding out that your peers have been sharing deep fake pornography of you is absolutely fine and a normal thing for young girls to go through in school. No girls have ever killed themselves because of this exact sort of thing, surely. This definitely will not add in any way to the way women and girls are made to feel entirely disgustingly dehumanized by every man or boy in their lives. Groups of men and boys reducing them and their bodies down to vivid sexual fantasies that they can quickly generate photo realistic images of.

    If the person in the image is underaged then it should be classified as child pornography. If the woman who's photo is being used hasnt consented to this then it should be classified as sexual exploitation.

    Women and girls have faced degrees of this kind of sexual exploitation by men and boys since the latter half of the 20th century. But this is a severe escalation in that behavior. It should be illegal to do this and it should be prosecuted when and where it is found to occur.

    It's bullying with a sexual element. The fact that it uses AI or deepfakes is secondary, just as it was secondary when it was photoshop, just as it was secondary when it was cutting out photos. It's always about using it bully someone.

    This is different because it's easier. It's not really different because it (can be) more realistic, because it was never about being realistic, otherwise blatantly unrealistic images wouldn't have been used to do it. Indeed, the fact that it can be realistic will help blunt the impact of the leaking of real nudes.

  • It's absolutely sexual harassment.

    But, to your question: you can't just say something has underage nudity when the nudity is of an adult model. It's not CSAM.

    Yes, it’s sexual abuse of a child, the same way taking surreptitious locker room photos would be. There’s nothing magical about a photograph of real skin vs a fake. The impact to the victim is the same. The impact to the viewer of the image is the same. Arguing over the semantic definition of “abuse” is getting people tangled up here. If we used the older term, “child porn” people wouldn’t be so hesitant to call this what it is.

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

    So is this a way to take away rights by making it about kids?

    I mean what the fuck. We did much less and got punished right? It didn't matter if we were on the property. Schools can hold students accountable for conduct with other students.

    The leaded-gas adults of the time had no problem dealing with the emergence of cell phones. It was a distraction. They didn't need lawmakers to call it something specific. My Pokemon cards caused fights and were banned. No lawmakers needed.

    The problem is surely with the interaction between parents and schools. Or maybe it's just the old way of thinking. Maybe it's better to have police and courts start taking over discipline in schools.

  • I don't know personally. The admins of the fediverse likely do, considering it's something they've had to deal with from the start.
    So, they can likely answer much better than I might be able to.

  • It's bullying with a sexual element. The fact that it uses AI or deepfakes is secondary, just as it was secondary when it was photoshop, just as it was secondary when it was cutting out photos. It's always about using it bully someone.

    This is different because it's easier. It's not really different because it (can be) more realistic, because it was never about being realistic, otherwise blatantly unrealistic images wouldn't have been used to do it. Indeed, the fact that it can be realistic will help blunt the impact of the leaking of real nudes.

    It's sexually objectifying the bodies of girls and turning them into shared sexual fantasies their male peers are engaging in. It is ABSOLUTELY different because it is more realistic. We are talking about entire deep fake porngraphy production and distribution groups IN THEIR OWN SCHOOLS. The amount of teenage boys cutting pictures out and photoshopping them was nowhere near as common as this is fast becoming and it was NOT the same as seeing a naked body algorithmically derived to appear as realistic as possible.

    Can you stop trying to find a silver lining in the sexual exploitation of teenage girls? You clearly don't understand the kinds of long term psychological harm that is caused by being exploited in this way. It was also exploitative and also fucked up when it was in photoshop, this many orders of magnitude more sophisticated and accessible.

    Youre also wrong that this is about bullying. Its an introduction to girls being tools for male sexual gratification. It's LITERALLY commodifiying teenage girls as sexual experiences and then sharing them in groups together. It's criminal. The consent of the individual has been entirely erased. Dehumanization in its most direct form. It should be against the law and it should be prosecuted very seriously wherever it is found to occur.

  • Disagree. Not CSAM when no abuse has taken place.

    That's my point.

    There's a thing that was happening in the past. Not sure it's still happening, due to lack of news about it. It was something called "glamour modeling" I think or an extension of it.

    Basically, official/legal photography studios took pictures of child models in swimsuits and revealing clothing, at times in suggestive positions and sold them to interested parties.

    Nothing untoward directly happened to the children. They weren't physically abused. They were treated as regular fashion models. And yet, it's still csam. Why? Because of the intention behind making those pictures.

    The intention to exploit.

  • 18 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    26 Aufrufe
    R
    highly likely, damn
  • 31 Stimmen
    4 Beiträge
    35 Aufrufe
    modernrisk@lemmy.dbzer0.comM
    Which group? Israel government or US government?
  • 83 Stimmen
    3 Beiträge
    30 Aufrufe
    I
    Facial recognition hates jugalos and adversarial clothing patterns
  • How a Spyware App Compromised Assad’s Army

    Technology technology
    2
    1
    41 Stimmen
    2 Beiträge
    24 Aufrufe
    S
    I guess that's why you pay your soldiers. In the early summer of 2024, months before the opposition launched Operation Deterrence of Aggression, a mobile application began circulating among a group of Syrian army officers. It carried an innocuous name: STFD-686, a string of letters standing for Syria Trust for Development. ... The STFD-686 app operated with disarming simplicity. It offered the promise of financial aid, requiring only that the victim fill out a few personal details. It asked innocent questions: “What kind of assistance are you expecting?” and “Tell us more about your financial situation.” ... Determining officers’ ranks made it possible for the app’s operators to identify those in sensitive positions, such as battalion commanders and communications officers, while knowing their exact place of service allowed for the construction of live maps of force deployments. It gave the operators behind the app and the website the ability to chart both strongholds and gaps in the Syrian army’s defensive lines. The most crucial point was the combination of the two pieces of information: Disclosing that “officer X” was stationed at “location Y” was tantamount to handing the enemy the army’s entire operating manual, especially on fluid fronts like those in Idlib and Sweida.
  • lemm.ee is shutting down at the end of this month

    Technology technology
    130
    625 Stimmen
    130 Beiträge
    632 Aufrufe
    vopyr@lemmy.worldV
    If I know correctly, it is not possible to export posts, comments, replies.
  • Whatever happened to cheap eReaders? – Terence Eden’s Blog

    Technology technology
    72
    1
    126 Stimmen
    72 Beiträge
    326 Aufrufe
    T
    This is a weirdly aggressive take without considering variables. Almost petulant seeming. 6” readers are relatively cheap no matter the brand, but cost goes up with size. $250 to $300 is what a 7.8” or 8” reader costs, but there’s not a single one I know of at 6” at that price. There’s 10” and 13” models. Are you saying they should cost the same as a Kindle? Not to mention, regarding Kindle, Amazon spent years building the brand but selling either at cost or possibly even taking a loss on the devices as they make money on the book sales. Companies who can’t do that tend to charge more. Lastly, it’s not “feature creep” to improve the devices over time, many changes are quality of life. Larger displays for those that want them. Frontlit displays, and later the addition of warm lighting. Displays essentially doubled their resolution allowing for crisper fonts and custom fonts to render well. Higher contrast displays with darker blacks for text. More recently color displays as an option. This is all progress, but it’s not free. Also, inflation is a thing and generally happens at a rate of 2% to 3% annually or thereabouts during “normal” times, and we’ve hardly been living in normal times over the last decade and a half.
  • Why doesn't Nvidia have more competition?

    Technology technology
    22
    1
    33 Stimmen
    22 Beiträge
    88 Aufrufe
    B
    It’s funny how the article asks the question, but completely fails to answer it. About 15 years ago, Nvidia discovered there was a demand for compute in datacenters that could be met with powerful GPU’s, and they were quick to respond to it, and they had the resources to focus on it strongly, because of their huge success and high profitability in the GPU market. AMD also saw the market, and wanted to pursue it, but just over a decade ago where it began to clearly show the high potential for profitability, AMD was near bankrupt, and was very hard pressed to finance developments on GPU and compute in datacenters. AMD really tried the best they could, and was moderately successful from a technology perspective, but Nvidia already had a head start, and the proprietary development system CUDA was already an established standard that was very hard to penetrate. Intel simply fumbled the ball from start to finish. After a decade of trying to push ARM down from having the mobile crown by far, investing billions or actually the equivalent of ARM’s total revenue. They never managed to catch up to ARM despite they had the better production process at the time. This was the main focus of Intel, and Intel believed that GPU would never be more than a niche product. So when intel tried to compete on compute for datacenters, they tried to do it with X86 chips, One of their most bold efforts was to build a monstrosity of a cluster of Celeron chips, which of course performed laughably bad compared to Nvidia! Because as it turns out, the way forward at least for now, is indeed the massively parralel compute capability of a GPU, which Nvidia has refined for decades, only with (inferior) competition from AMD. But despite the lack of competition, Nvidia did not slow down, in fact with increased profits, they only grew bolder in their efforts. Making it even harder to catch up. Now AMD has had more money to compete for a while, and they do have some decent compute units, but Nvidia remains ahead and the CUDA problem is still there, so for AMD to really compete with Nvidia, they have to be better to attract customers. That’s a very tall order against Nvidia that simply seems to never stop progressing. So the only other option for AMD is to sell a bit cheaper. Which I suppose they have to. AMD and Intel were the obvious competitors, everybody else is coming from even further behind. But if I had to make a bet, it would be on Huawei. Huawei has some crazy good developers, and Trump is basically forcing them to figure it out themselves, because he is blocking Huawei and China in general from using both AMD and Nvidia AI chips. And the chips will probably be made by Chinese SMIC, because they are also prevented from using advanced production in the west, most notably TSMC. China will prevail, because it’s become a national project, of both prestige and necessity, and they have a massive talent mass and resources, so nothing can stop it now. IMO USA would clearly have been better off allowing China to use American chips. Now China will soon compete directly on both production and design too.
  • 35 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    13 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet