this post was submitted on 23 Apr 2024
908 points (97.1% liked)

Technology

59672 readers
4191 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Instagram is profiting from several ads that invite people to create nonconsensual nude images with AI image generation apps, once again showing that some of the most harmful applications of AI tools are not hidden on the dark corners of the internet, but are actively promoted to users by social media companies unable or unwilling to enforce their policies about who can buy ads on their platforms.

While parent company Meta’s Ad Library, which archives ads on its platforms, who paid for them, and where and when they were posted, shows that the company has taken down several of these ads previously, many ads that explicitly invited users to create nudes and some ad buyers were up until I reached out to Meta for comment. Some of these ads were for the best known nonconsensual “undress” or “nudify” services on the internet.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 64 points 7 months ago (33 children)

It remains fascinating to me how these apps are being responded to in society. I'd assume part of the point of seeing someone naked is to know what their bits look like, while these just extrapolate with averages (and likely, averages of glamor models). So we still dont know what these people actually look like naked.

And yet, people are still scorned and offended as if they were.

Technology is breaking our society, albeit in place where our culture was vulnerable to being broken.

[–] [email protected] 101 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (4 children)

And yet, people are still scorned and offended as if they were.

I think you are missing the plot here... If a naked pic of yourself, your mother, your wife, your daughter is circulating around the campus, work or just online... Are you really going to be like "lol my nipples are lighter and they don't know" ??

You may not get that job, promotion, entry into program, etc. The harm done by naked pics in public would just as real weather the representation is accurate or not ... And that's not even starting to talk about the violation of privacy and overall creepiness of whatever people will do with that pic of your daughter out there

[–] Zoomboingding 42 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I believe their point is that an employer logically shouldn't care if some third party fabricates an image resembling you. We still have an issue with latent puritanism, and this needs to be addressed as we face the reality of more and more convincing fakes of images, audio, and video.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 7 months ago (2 children)

I agree... however, we live in the world we live in, where employers do discriminate as much as they can before getting in trouble with the law

[–] Zoomboingding 15 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I think the only thing we can do is to help out by calling this out. AI fakes are just advanced gossip, and people need to realize that.

[–] TwilightVulpine 3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

But it doesn't. Nobody who is harassed or has their prospects undermined because of AI fakes is helped by repeating that. Especially because as the technology advances the only way to verify its legitimacy will be to compare it with real intimate pictures, which the person cannot show without being exposed to the exact same treatment.

It also doesn't help that gossip can do all that harm as well so the point is moot.

Trying to point out that this is illogical and that nudes shouldn't even be such a big deal is an uphill battle against human emotional, social and cultural tendencies. It would take much more than some offhand comments to affect it at all, and I wouldn't count on that shift happening before the harms of AI fakes spread.

[–] Zoomboingding 5 points 7 months ago (2 children)

The ubiquity of AI fakes will necessitate a cultural shift. Honestly, the world is going to be a nightmare of misinformation soon and nudes may very well be the least of our worries.

What other options do we have? An ironclad verification system for any fabricated content? Wildly harsh penalties for all caught creating it? The ship has sailed - we won't be able to prevent it from happening.

I'd argue that overexposure will make people quickly become accustomed/nonplussed at information we don't believe to be true and verify with the source. Look at how we treat other fabricated content - if I showed you a screencap of the Pope saying "Fuck" you'd want to verify with a source directly.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 8 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (2 children)

Well I think the whole point of this post is that the world is changing towards this being the norm. If an employer says they're not hiring me because of a nude photo, I'm just going to post 500 nudes of them and ask how they feel about it now 😂

[–] [email protected] 5 points 7 months ago

It's a race to the bottom then ;-)

[–] psud 4 points 7 months ago

This might even provide cover for those with real nude photos circulating

[–] [email protected] 20 points 7 months ago (2 children)

This is a transitional period issue. In a couple of years you can just say AI made it even if it's a real picture and everyone will believe you. Fake nudes are in no way a new thing anyway. I used to make dozens of these by request back in my edgy 4chan times 15 years ago.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 7 months ago

This is a transitional period issue. In a couple of years you can just say AI made it even if it’s a real picture and everyone will believe you.

Sure, but the question of whether they harm the victim is still real... if your prospective employer finds tons of pics of you with nazi flags, guns and drugs... they may just "play it safe" and pass on you... no matter how much you claim (or even the employer might think) they are fakes

[–] Duamerthrax 19 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (2 children)

Dead internet.

It also means in a few years, any terrible thing someone does will just be excused as a "deep fake" if you have the resources and any terrible thing someone wants to pin on you with be cooked up in seconds. People wont just blanket believe or disbelieve any possible deep fake. They'll cherry pick what to believe based on their preexisting world view and how confident the story telling comes across.

As far as your old edits go, if they're anything like the ones I saw, they were terrible and not believable at all.

[–] TangledHyphae 9 points 7 months ago

I'm still on the google prompt bandwagon of typing this query:

stuff i am searching for before:2023.. or ideally, even before COVID19, if you want more valuable, less tainted results. It's only going to get worse from here, 2024 is the year of saturation with garbage data on the web (yes I know it was already bad before, but now AI is pumping this shit out at an industrial scale.)

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 7 months ago (2 children)

"Fools! Everybody at my school is laughing at me for having a 2-incher, but little do they know it actually curves to the LEFT!"

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago (7 children)

On the other end, I welcome the widespread creation of these of EVERYONE, so that it becomes impossible for them to be believable. No one should be refused from a job/promotion because of the existence of a real one IMO and this will give plausible deniability.

[–] [email protected] 25 points 7 months ago (3 children)

People are refused for jobs/promotions on the most arbitrary basis, often against existing laws but they are impossible to enforce.

Even if it is normalized, there is always the escalation factor.. sure, nobody won't hire Anita because of her nudes out there, everyone has them and they are probably fake right?... but Perdita? hmmm I don't want my law firm associated in any way with her pics of tentacle porn, that's just too much!

Making sure we are all in the gutter is not really a good way to deal with this issue... specially since it will, once again, impact women 100x more than it will affect men

[–] TwilightVulpine 7 points 7 months ago

This is a consideration that a lot of people are glossing over. Schlubby dudes might not even be affected to it at all. It's not going to be widespread for everyone.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 months ago

Post your clothed full body pic

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Beebabe 30 points 7 months ago (5 children)

Something like this could be career ending for me. Because of the way people react. “Oh did you see Mrs. Bee on the internet?” Would have to change my name and move three towns over or something. That’s not even considering the emotional damage of having people download you. Knowledge that “you” are dehumanized in this way. It almost takes the concept of consent and throws it completely out the window. We all know people have lewd thoughts from time to time, but I think having a metric on that…it would be so twisted for the self-image of the victim. A marketplace for intrusive thoughts where anyone can be commodified. Not even celebrities, just average individuals trying to mind their own business.

[–] captainlezbian 12 points 7 months ago

Exactly. I’m not even shy, my boobs have been out plenty and I’ve sent nudes all that. Hell I met my wife with my tits out. But there’s a wild difference between pictures I made and released of my own will in certain contexts and situations vs pictures attempting to approximate my naked body generated without my knowledge or permission because someone had a whim.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I think this is why it's going to be interesting to see how we navigate this as a society. So far, we've done horribly. It's been over a century now that we've acknowledged sexual harassment in the workplace is a problem that harms workers (and reduces productivity) and yet it remains an issue today (only now we know the human resources department will protect the corporate image and upper management by trying to silence the victims).

What deepfakes and generative AI does is make it easy for a campaign staffer, or an ambitious corporate later climber with a buddy with knowhow, or even a determined grade-school student to create convincing media and publish it on the internet. As I note in the other response, if a teen's sexts get reported to law enforcement, they'll gladly turn it into a CSA production and distribution issue and charge the teens themselves with serious felonies with long prison sentences. Now imagine if some kid wanted to make a rival disappear. Heck, imagine the smart kid wanting to exact revenge on a social media bully, now equipped with the power of generative AI.

The thing is, the tech is out of the bag, and as with princes in the mid-east looking at cloned sheep (with deteriorating genetic defects) looking to create a clone of himself as an heir, humankind will use tech in the worst, most heinous possible ways until we find cause to cease doing so. (And no, judicial punishment doesn't stop anyone). So this is going to change society, whether we decide collectively that sexuality (even kinky sexuality) is not grounds to shame and scorn someone, or that we use media scandals the way Italian monastics and Russian oligarchs use poisons, and scandalize each other like it's the shootout at O.K. Corral.

[–] Beebabe 3 points 7 months ago

Thanks, I liked this reply. There is a lot of nuance here.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] inb4_FoundTheVegan 19 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (7 children)

Wtf are you even talking about? People should have the right to control if they are "approximated" as nude. You can wax poetic how it's not nessecarily correct but that's because you are ignoring the woman who did not consent to the process. Like, if I posted a nude then that's on the internet forever. But now, any picture at all can be made nude and posted to the internet forever. You're entirely removing consent from the equation you ass.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 months ago (3 children)

Totally get your frustration, but people have been imagining, drawing, and photoshopping people naked since forever. To me the problem is if they try and pass it off as real. If someone can draw photorealistic pieces and drew someone naked, we wouldn't have the same reaction, right?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 7 months ago (6 children)

I don't think you are accounting for ease of use. It took time and skill for an individual to photoshop someone else. This is just an app. It takes more effort to prove the truth, then it does to create a lie. Not to mention, how in the other article it explains that people are using this to bait children. :/

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

I'm not arguing whether people should or should not have control over whether others can produce a nude (or lewd) likeness or perpetuate false scandal, only that this technology doesn't change the equation. People have been accused of debauchery and scorned long before the invention of the camera, let alone digital editing.

Julia the Elder was portrayed (poorly, mind you) in sexual congress on Roman graffiti. Marie Antoinette was accused of a number of debauched sexual acts she didn't fully comprehend. Marie Antoinette actually had an uninteresting sex life. It was accusations of The German Vice (id est lesbianism) that were the most believable and quickened her path to the guillotine.

The movie, The Contender (2000) addresses the issue with happenstance evidence. A woman politician was caught on video inflagrante delicto at a frat party in her college years just as she was about to be appointed as a replacement Vice President.

Law enforcement still regards sexts between underage teens as child porn, and our legal system will gladly incarcerate those teens for the crime of expressing their intimacy to their lovers. (Maine, I believe, is the sole exception, having finally passed laws to let teens use picture messaging to court each other.) So when it comes to the intersection of human sexuality and technology, so far we suck at navigating it.

To be fair, when it comes to human sexuality at all, US society sucks at navigating it. We still don't discuss consent in grade school. I can't speak for anywhere else in the world, though I've not heard much good news.

The conversation about revenge porn (which has been made illegal without the consent of all participants in the US) appears to inform how society regards explicit content of private citizens. I can't speak to paparazzi content. Law hasn't quite caught up with Photoshop, let alone deepfakes and content made with generative AI systems.

But my point was, public life, whether in media, political, athletic or otherwise, is competitive and involves rivalries that get dirty. Again, if we, as a species actually had the capacity for reason, we would be able to choose our cause célèbre with rationality, and not judge someone because some teenager prompted a genAI platform to create a convincing scandalous video.

I think we should be above that, as a society, but we aren't. My point was that I don't fully understand the mechanism by which our society holds contempt for others due to circumstances outside their control, a social behavior I find more abhorrent than using tech to create a fictional image of someone in the buff for private use.

Sadly, fictitious explicit media can be as effective as a character assassination tool as the real thing. I think it should be otherwise. I think we should be better than that, but we're not. I am, consequently frustrated and disappointed with my society and my species. And while I think we're going to need to be more mature about it, I've opined this since high school in the 1980s and things have only gotten worse.

At the same time, it's like the FGC-9, the tech cannot be contained any than we can stop software piracy with DRM. Nor can we trust the community at large to use it responsibly. So yes, you can expect explicit media of colleagues to fly much the way accusations of child sexual assault flew in the 1990s (often without evidence in middle and upper management. It didn't matter.) And we may navigate it pretty much the same way, with the same high rate of career casualties.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 13 points 7 months ago (2 children)

The draw to these apps is that the user can exploit anyone they want. It's not really about sex, it's about power.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 7 months ago

Human society is about power. It is because we can't get past dominance hierarchy that our communities do nothing about schoolyard bullies, or workplace sexual harassment. It is why abstinence-only sex-ed has nothing positive to say to victims of sexual assault, once they make it clear that used goods are used goods.

Our culture agrees by consensus that seeing a woman naked, whether a candid shot, caught inflagrante delicto or rendered from whole cloth by a generative AI system, redefines her as a sexual object, reducing her qualifications as a worker, official or future partner. That's a lot of power to give to some guy with X-ray Specs, and it speaks poorly of how society regards women, or human beings in general.

We disregard sex workers, too.

Violence sucks, but without the social consensus the propagates sexual victimhood, it would just be violence. Sexual violence is extra awful because the rest of society actively participates in making it extra awful.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I suspect it's more affecting for younger people who don't really think about the fact that in reality, no one has seen them naked. Probably traumatizing for them and logic doesn't really apply in this situation.

[–] StitchIsABitch 23 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Does it really matter though? "Well you see, they didn't actually see you naked, it was just a photorealistic approximation of what you would look like naked".

At that point I feel like the lines get very blurry, it's still going to be embarrassing as hell, and them not being "real" nudes is not a big comfort when having to confront the fact that there are people masturbating to your "fake" nudes without your consent.

I think in a few years this won't really be a problem because by then these things will be so widespread that no one will care, but right now the people being specifically targeted by this must not be feeling great.

[–] snek 20 points 7 months ago

It depends where you are in the world. In the Middle East, even a deepfake of you naked could get you killed if your family is insane.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 7 months ago

It depends very much on the individual apparently. I don't have a huge data set but there are girls that I know that have had this has happened to them, and some of them have just laughed it off and really not seemed like they cared. But again they were in their mid twenties not 18 or 19.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil 9 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (6 children)

So we still dont know what these people actually look like naked.

I think the offense is in the use of their facial likeness far more than their body.

If you took a naked super-sized barbie doll and plastered Taylor Swift's face on it, then presented it to an audience for the purpose of jerking off, the argument "that's not what Taylor's tits look like!" wouldn't save you.

Technology is breaking our society

Unregulated advertisement combined with a clickbait model for online marketing is fueling this deluge of creepy shit. This isn't simply a "Computers Evil!" situation. Its much more that a handful of bad actors are running Silicon Valley into the ground.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] Mango 9 points 7 months ago (3 children)

Technology isn't doing shit to society. Society is fucking itself like it always has.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] nandeEbisu 8 points 7 months ago

Regardless of what one might think should happen or expect to happen, the actual psychological effect is harmful to the victim. It's like if you walked up to someone and said "I'm imagining you naked" that's still harassment and off-putting to the person, but the image apps have been shown to have much much more severe effects.

It's like the demonstration where they get someone to feel like a rubber hand is theirs, then hit it with a hammer. It's still a negative sensation even if it's not a strictly logical one.

load more comments (25 replies)