[jacknews]

I don't get it. Everyone knows that a nude is going to be AI. Even actual nudes can be explained away as just AI.

Sure it's distasteful, but it's no different to cutting and pasting heads onto porn stars as was done plenty before.

I'm not saying there's entirely no harm in that, it's obviously a form of bullying, but AI does not make it novel, or a crisis.

[phainopepla2]

You really don't get how distressing it would be to a teenage girl to have extremely realistic nudes of her spread around publicly, even if everyone knows they're AI generated? Did you try imagining yourself in her place, imagining the social world she inhabits?

[UltraSane]

It really is only as distressing as you let it be.

[ceejayoz]

Thank goodness middle schoolers have fully developed adult emotional regulation, then.

[lostmsu]

How do you think kids develop emotional regulation exactly? Do you think it comes from hearing repeated "It's OK" after a child fell?

[ceejayoz]

> How do you think kids develop emotional regulation exactly?

That depends on what they're exposed to, how much of it, and how quickly.

Too much nastiness and you get PTSD and catatonia, like kids in Gaza or child abuse victims. Or suicide.

Children need to experience bad stimuli, for sure. But that doesn't mean they can cope with unlimited really bad stimuli.

> Do you think it comes from hearing repeated "It's OK" after a child fell?

No. But it doesn't come from "you fucking idiot child, you can't even walk properly, you'll never amount to anything" either.

[UltraSane]

Well then they should be TAUGHT this. Because the technology isn't going away.

[lawn]

I believe you need to be taught that if you're under-developed you literally cannot be taught it yet.

(Alas I guess that might be true for this lesson too!)

[UltraSane]

The embarrassment the person suffers depends entirely on how they are raised to view nudity and sex.

[red-iron-pine]

how do you teach someone whose brain is still developing?

"hey kids, get used to being exploited sexually, as it would be too expensive to require massive multinational corporations to bother to regulate AI"

[UltraSane]

Teaching someone when their brain is still developing is the BEST TIME to teach them.

Open models cannot be regulated. The genie is out of the bottle permanently.

[phainopepla2]

This is an almost sociopathic lack of empathy

[mrweasel]

You can leave the "almost" out. That was an absolutely deranged comment that completely ignores reality.

[UltraSane]

Expecting people to react to AI generated porn of them like it was real forever is what is actually absolutely derange.

[UltraSane]

The way people react to things isn't set in stone and people will HAVE to adapt to this technology.

[housebear]

You don't "get it" because you are not a person who would ever be at risk of suffering the embarrassment, shame, and violation of something like this happening to you. These are not "porn stars" being talked about. These are children. In classes with the same children perpetrating these acts. Do you remember being a child? Do you remember the nuances and challenges of social dynamics from those years? Can you imagine (empathize with) being a young girl and having fake nudes of yourself sent around to others? I don't imagine you can. "Distasteful" doesn't begin to cover it.

[jacknews]

I have exactly that demographic kids.

It is bullying.

But AI does not make it more than that, or a crisis.

edit: Oh I get it now, we have some lobby group posting here.

[ceejayoz]

That's like saying machine guns didn't change warfare because we had guns before that.

[UncleMeat]

AI makes this vastly easier for students to do and makes the fakes vastly more realistic. Scale matters.

A bullying machine that makes this sort of extreme bullying trivial and leads directly to widespread use of the bullying machine is a massive problem.

[housebear]

So any time a larger group disagrees with you it's a concerted lobbying effort? Not because a significant number disagrees with your opinion? Because you might have an odious opinion? Really? Does that apply to all of your takes? How liberating! "No...it's the children who are wrong."

[alephnerd]

Using Photoshop to paste a face on a nude body has significant frictions that a non-guardrailed foundation model eliminates.

Furthermore, most people are not technical in nature and cannot tell the difference between deepfakes and real photos and videos in short bursts.

Basically, the friction needed to develop revenge porn has been dramatically reduced.

[brazzy]

> Most people are not technical in nature and cannot tell the difference between deepfakes and real photos and videos

They don't need to. The point is that eventually, everyone will just assume it's a fake, exactly because you can't tell, and fakes are easier to produce and thus more common than real leaked nude photos and videos. At that point, a deepfake shouldn't be more socially damaging than a rumor.

[ceejayoz]

> At that point, a deepfake shouldn't be more socially damaging than a rumor.

Rumors can be exceedingly damaging - to the point of death - even without convincing photographic evidence of it.

[brazzy]

Yes - but we've been dealing with that reality pretty much since humans existed.

[ceejayoz]

And we were dealing with "people kill other people" before nukes and guns and explosives and knives.

But the fancier tooling changed things a bit each time.

[yoz-y]

Eventually maybe, but we’re not there yet.

After social media became common it was also hypothesized that embarrassing stories dug up from somebody’s last would not be harmful anymore but that future has never materialized.

[red-iron-pine]

if we ever get to that point, where it is no longer capable to distinguish true from falsity, they're done as a society.

this is not a good, nor should it ever be, an inevitable thing

[brazzy]

Human society existed, survived, and improved before photographic or video evidence was a thing. I don't see how these becoming useless would be an unsurmountable blow.

[4star3star]

It's hard to grapple with the degree of the offense. It is offensive. Imagine a small village a couple hundred years ago with a central square and something like a bulletin board. Someone paints an explicit painting using a village youth's face an puts it on the bulletin board. That's going to create quite a stir, and maybe a lynch mob. I don't want to trivialize the offense.

That said, there's the question of where the line is drawn. If I clip from a biology textbook an image of a nude woman, and I clip the Gerber baby's head and paste it onto the nude woman's head, what is that? If I generate the face of a young boy, then draw a stick figure under it and give the stick figure a stick erection, what is that? I don't know. I mean these things are weird and offensive, but to what degree?

[spwa4]

Is it? The male school toilets in high school were full of graffiti messages implying particular girls were open to prostitution or whatever. Something insulting. Sometimes this included their phone number (cell phones became a thing when I was ~halfway through high school). Sometimes "drawings". You can guess which parts were emphasized. Hell, occasionally a guy got this treatment too.

There were a few really big stinks about this too, with the school director getting involved.

I mean, this is not new. Just evolved.

[jader201]

> I don't get it.

You must not have kids. If you did, I’m speculating that you’d get it.

If you do have kids (or if you can empathize having kids), would you be ok with tech that super easily allows your kids’ peers to share/laugh about nudes of your kids?

[Trav5]

I have kids, I would not be OK with anyone doing that to my kids. That is much different from being OK with the technology existing. Kids/people doing terrible things and kids/people allowing it to continue is the problem.

You can kill with a gun, a knife, a fork. Removing the tool does not change the situation of being around a person who wants to kill you.

We homeschool our kids and they have grown up to be respectful people.

[mywittyname]

It's significantly different. It's better quality, more accurate, and more convincing.

[jacknews]

But it's still not real.

[reactordev]

Not going to win any points with a “boys will be boys” argument…

[jacknews]

That is not my argument.

It's that AI is not novel and does not present a crisis.

[runjake]

It's still humiliating, harassing and bullying to those (often women) experiencing it.

[cpburns2009]

So prosecute the crime. The tool is irrelevant.

[runjake]

That's the point?