this post was submitted on 10 Feb 2024
537 points (100.0% liked)

The Onion

5753 readers
668 users here now

The Onion

A place to share and discuss stories from The Onion, Clickhole, and other satire.

Great Satire Writing:

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
all 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 48 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Unfortunately, it's computer code and there is essentially nothing that can be done to prevent its use. They can only punish its users, and if we know anything about prohibition, it has (at best) zero effect to dissuade potential offenders.

I sincerely hope nobody uses it to generate porn of real people without their consent. With that said, it is highly likely if not absolutely certain that bolstering authority on this issue will have disasterous effects that last for generations. It only takes a brief glance over history to see why.

We have only barely held onto our digital freedom. They are trying to strip it at turn. Now it's "protect the kids" but we are witnessing the narrative shift in real time.

What I'm saying is don't be surprised if using open source software carries a prison sentence in first world countries in the near future.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Porn from celebrities without consent was one of the first applications I ever saw it used for back when it was new tech.

And also adding Nicholas Cage into random movie scenes but still...

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yet, oddly enough, a disappointingly low amount of Nicholas Cage in porn.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Be the change you wish to see in the world

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Gonna make one called National Pleasure

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

The Unbearable Weight of Massive Wieners.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

It would be just like regular porn but Nicholas Cage would also be there.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I think you're assuming we're discussing regulating deep fakes (the software), when really everyone is talking about regulating deep fakes (, the use of).

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

... This is to say, making it illegal to generate life-like images and videos of celebrities, non-celebrities, and political figures without consent is in no way this doomsday scenario you say.

Defamation and libel are illegal. You can use open-source tools to perform defamation and libel, or you can use those same tools in a way that doesn't constitute defamation and libel.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

Part of the confusion around regulation, at least in the US, is that movie studios such as Disney REALLY want to be able to use deepfakes of celebrities

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

It's foolish to think you can restrict one and not the other, and it's even more foolish to think our authoritarian governments would do that it they could

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

No matter how you turn it, though, AI will be disruptive to life as we know it. The question is how to handle it. No media outlets will be spared until we figure out a way of validating information.

My favourite vision is how an AI robocaller is chatting with an AI answering machine. But honestly, why have a phone at all? All your loved ones calling may just as well be deep fakes trying to scam you for money.

It is clear we need to do something to prepare, but what? As you say, the cat is already out of the bag, so how do we proceed from here? AntiAI-software in the same way we have antivirus software? Even open source self hosting wount be enough, somehow you need to validate who to trust. Even if it would be a start...

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I really need a Poe’s Law check on this.

I’m shell-shocked from witnessing libertarian tech bros defending deepfake child porn, and I can longer distinguish earnest AI booster sentiment from satire.

Please give me a /s so I can sleep at night.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

My original post was not sarcasm, but if it helps, let me be explicit: People producing CSAM of any kind, real or generated, need to be put through a wood chipper feet first. I would pay money to do myself.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 24 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I hate that I still have to check out obvious satire to make sure it really is satire now.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago

I would recommend not diving into these comments or else you're gonna find the real-world equivalent of the dude this article is making fun of.

Yikes.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

The stock photo guy absolutely looks like the kinda person who would make some very... Uncomfortable deepfakes.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago

Or did he?!

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 year ago

Lots of onions eaten in this comment section.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 year ago

I don't use or frequently browse deep fakes and I don't think they should be regulated. Governments have never regulated the internet in a way that didn't have cascading negative effects elsewhere.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago

You know what? Fuck it. I'm not even into deepfakes. If someone wants to blast rope to me getting railed by waluigi then have at it. The future is now old man.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago

Just like Trump, everything he complains about is projection.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago

Ethan is showin up big time in these comments. Holy shit.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Only people who believe they'd benefit from regulating deepfakes are some high profile and/or internet narcissists.

"Boohoo someone made a video of Trump's hemorrhoids and Biden licking them" Everyone already knows you can easily fake some video without using "AI" for it, we have a whole fucking industry for it pumping hundred movies out every Saturday. We already know you shouldn't believe everything you see.

[–] [email protected] 29 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Goes a bit beyond that nowadays. Deep fakes can be used to create false evidence for example

[–] [email protected] 34 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Deepfakes are already being used on an industrial scale for scams and conning people.

It's not a case of them needing regulating because they offend peoples sensibilities, it's because they're actively being used to harm people.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

how would more regulation help? what you are talking about is already illegal

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The same way cracking down on CP helps make it harder to access by pedos.

Y'all are seriously looking creepy

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Good one. You want to lock people up but people who believe in the first amendment are creepy. Nice spoof of moral panic populism.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Not everyone is an American idiot

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

True. Freedom of speech and of the press is a peculiarly American thing. In virtually all other countries... No, wait. That's the 2nd amendment. What were we talking about?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Good one. You want the freedom to create any porn you want regardless of who it hurts without any personal accountability.

This is a weird hill to die on but I've seen worse. Not really.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You don't have to be a Hugh Hefner to reject fascism.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

Putting in safeguards to protect people from porn being made of them is fascism?

Like I said. Weird hill.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

Yeah, fraud used to be such a fun pastime for the whole family. Now we need to regulate it. Technology ruins everything.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

The past month or so I've started encountering quite a few deepfakes on dating sites. I honestly can't tell they're deepfakes just by looking; the only reason I've realised tell is because they were very obviously Instagram model photos. I reverse image searched them to find where they were taken from and confirm my suspicions that the profile's using stolen photos, only to find that the original photos aren't quite the same. It'll be the exact same shot with the same body but a different face, and with identifying tattoos removed, moles adds, etc.

If they weren't obvious modelling shots that made me want to reverse image search them, I wouldn't have known at all. It makes me wonder how many deepfaked images I've encountered on dating sites already and just not known about because they've been fairly innocuous-looking photos...

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago (2 children)
[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

In a courtroom sure. What about putting it on YouTube?

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago

Okay but can you tell the difference between legal real evidence and illegal false evidence?

The technology is there to create this type of false evidence, it's not going back to the Pandora's box anymore. The truth is that you can't trust a single videotape as 100% evidence alone.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago

I believe it's a power grab. The more you regulate or force licensing costs on AI tools the harder it is to use without having large capital.

Meaning those with all the money can use AI while regular people or small companies or startups can't.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

"Don't you know that our plans have your interest - not ours - in mind"?

Unironically if it's a struggle to understand why regulation of AI is far more dangerous than AI than I have a pair of boots to sell you. They go on your neck, and you'll be the one who asks for them to go there. But don't worry, they'll keep you safe, and if you don't unconditionally beleive me you are somehow wrong.