A mother and her 14-year-old daughter are advocating for better protections for victims after AI-generated nude images of the teen and other female classmates were circulated at a high school in New Jersey.

Meanwhile, on the other side of the country, officials are investigating an incident involving a teenage boy who allegedly used artificial intelligence to create and distribute similar images of other students – also teen girls - that attend a high school in suburban Seattle, Washington.

The disturbing cases have put a spotlight yet again on explicit AI-generated material that overwhelmingly harms women and children and is booming online at an unprecedented rate. According to an analysis by independent researcher Genevieve Oh that was shared with The Associated Press, more than 143,000 new deepfake videos were posted online this year, which surpasses every other year combined.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 53 points 2 years ago* (14 children)

There are genuine reasons not to give people sole authority over their image though. "Oh that's a picture of me genuinely doing something bad, you can't publish that!"

Like, we still need to be able to have a public conversation about (especially political) public figures and their actions as photographed

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Seems like a typical copyright issue. The copyright owner has a monopoly on the intellectual property, but there are (genuine reasons) fair use exceptions (for journalism, satire, academic, backup, etc.)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Reminder that the stated reason for copyrights to exist say all, per the US Constitution, is “To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries.”

    Anything that occurs naturally falls outside the original rationale. We've experienced a huge expansion of the concept of intellectual property since then, but as far as I can tell there has never been a consensus on what purpose intellectual property rights are supposed to serve beyond the original conception.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago

    Makes sense. If I do something worth taking a picture of that means I have zero rights to it since that is "natural", but the person who took the photo has all the rights to it.

    Tell me this crap wasn't written for and by the worst garbage publishers out there.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago*

    Yeah I'm not stipulating a law where you can't be held accountable for actions. Any actions you take as an individual are things you do that impact your image, of which you are in control. People using photographic evidence to prove you have done them is not a misuse of your image.

    Making fake images whole cloth is.

    The question of whether this technology will make such evidence untrustworthy is another conversation that sadly I don't have enough time for right this moment.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -8 points 2 years ago (9 children)

    If you have a picture of someone doing something bad you really should be talking to law enforcement not Faceboot. If it isnt so bad that it is criminal I wonder why it is your concern?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 2 years ago (8 children)

    It's not just "taking it to law enforcement", it's a freedom of the press issue.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 2 years ago (7 children)

    Can you address what I brought up?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    My experience with the police is that most of them will systematically ignore denounces up until the issue has already grown out of control. Outside of that, there are things that are unethical but not illegal, but you might want to denounce publicly anyway.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Ok so your plan is if you see someone do something illegal is to depend on faceboot

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments