this post was submitted on 14 Aug 2023
193 points (95.3% liked)

Technology

34358 readers
341 users here now

This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.


Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.


Rules:

1: All Lemmy rules apply

2: Do not post low effort posts

3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff

4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.

5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)

6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist

7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
top 46 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Lemmylefty 104 points 1 year ago

While TikTok has removed multiple videos depicting James narrating his abduction and death in Kirkby, England, many remain available to view on YouTube.

This is fucking ghoulish.

Does this constitute psychological torture? I’m serious. This is so much eviler than what Westboro does.

Christ. I already hate these people.

[–] [email protected] 85 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Stuart Fergus, the husband of James Bulger’s mother, said that after he reached out to one creator asking them to take down their video, he received a reply saying: “We do not intend to offend anyone. We only do these videos to make sure incidents will never happen again to anyone. Please continue to support and share my page to spread ­awareness.”

He really tried to take down his wife's dead kid's deepfake and got the creator responding "no offense, so like share and subscribe lel"

Using the likeness of another person without that person's express permission should be a jailable offense.

[–] [email protected] 30 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They seem to be getting a pass on using copyrighted materials to feed these programs so I am doubting that we would get legislation protecting our own likenesses, or those of our loved ones. I bet you couldn't even get lawmakers to understand what they would need to write into law. They (american lawmakers) all seem to be so up to speed on technology. /s

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

Not until someone starts making clips of lawmakers narrating their own crimes and unethical behavior, then they'll get it done immediately.

Not that I'm suggesting anyone do that...

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

I was thinking the same thing, or if a lawmakers granddaughter is AI'ed into some porn.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

How the fuck does someone go from "I want to punish this person" to "lets make porn of a woman in his life who has nothing to do with it, that'll show 'em!"??

Surely there are a million ways you can come up with to include whichever lawmaker in a deepfake that don't include violating an unrelated woman?

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

Because that's a news story I have already read about. This has happened to people. No need to be so sanctimonious.

[–] TheBat 6 points 1 year ago

We only do these videos to make sure incidents will never happen again to anyone.

Fuck this concern troll.

[–] [email protected] 48 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

This feels so much like a cyberpunk story. It’s so dehumanizing and has such disregard for humanity that it feels like a perfect match for the genre.

I’m really starting to understand how old people get to a point where they no longer want to keep with the times. This is gross.

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

Keep summer safe

[–] [email protected] 41 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Anne Frank advertising baby clothes before discussing the horrors of the Holocaust

Wow, that is amazingly inhumane.

My first thought is they're necessarily making characters who aren't people. A person who has lived through the Holocaust just cannot cheerfully peddle baby clothes. I don't mean that it's physically not possible because she's dead: I mean in terms of the human psyche, a person just flat-out psychologically could not do that. A young boy who succumbed to torture and murder psychology cannot just calmly narrate it.

So obviously, yeah, it's quite a ghoulish and evil thing to take what used to be a person, and a figure who has been studied and mourned because of their personhood, because we can relate to them as a person, and just completely strip them of their personhood and turn them into an inhumane object.

But then that leads to me the question of, who's watching these things, and why? The article says they got quite a lot of views. Is it just for shock value? I don't quite understand.

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

Have you met the true crime community? They would eat this stuff up.

[–] TheBat 1 points 1 year ago

I don't get them. Why would you keep watching and discussing this stuff? Have they got no empathy?

[–] [email protected] 33 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

This is inarguably horrible but the use of AI seems irrelevant. You could make this same thing with any animation tool. It's the idea that's disgusting.

Do you think AI is mentioned because it makes the article seem more up to the minute and in keeping with current tech trends?

"A man drew a disgusting picture of a horrible event using pencils and paper this week."

"Pencils and paper are so awful."

[–] TheBat 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The ratio of effort to output is off the chart. Don't pretend you don't get it.

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

Why does that matter in this context?

[–] TheBat -5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You really don't see any difference between using an AI to generate powershell script and using AI to milk murder of children?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I don't see the difference between doing this with AI or doing it with Photoshop. It's horrible independently of the tools used.

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

Thanks. That was precisely my point. The tools used to make this are irrelevant. It's fucked up regardless.

[–] TheBat -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

These assholes are generating this content at superspeed while putting in minimal efforts. They're hurting more people in less time.

Your point sucks.

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

So what is your point? It takes less effort now, therefor...

[–] TheBat -5 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Cool, so you see no problem with these ghouls being even more efficient with AI because governments have zero fucking clue about new technology?

Are you too stupid to understand why that is a horrible thing?

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

Wait, what does Government tech-illiteracy have to do with this?

[–] TheBat 2 points 1 year ago

These people are using likeliness of actual people without their (or their heirs'/parents' in case of dead people) permission to make money off of tragedies. I don't know about you, but I think we as a society should have laws from preventing this from happening.

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

I think there should be legal avenues to shut down people who do that shit.

It doesn't matter what tools they're using. The solution is the same regardless.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So you would support government limiting an individual's right to run software on their computer because you don't agree with what the software outputs?

That's absolute nonsense. The entire premise of these machine learning models is that they accept any arbitrary input, you would want to neuter that?

[–] TheBat 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They're not just running the software on their computer. They're publishing it on the internet for mass consumption you amazingly dense potato.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

So it's acceptable for AIs to generate these sorts of outputs, as long as they aren't shared online? Sure, the outputs aren't very tasteful, but they're certainly not illegal by any stretch.

Why do you think the government should intervene, and what you would even expect them to do? No laws are being broken.

If you somehow forbid AIs from generating this through a national law just because it's offensive, it'll open to floodgates to ban 1,000 other things that are offensive. Where do you draw the line? Ban this content from websites like TikTok, sure. But it doesn't make sense to regulate this from the AIs themselves.

[–] [email protected] 29 points 1 year ago

“Hello, my name is James Bulger,” says the image in one TikTok video, made in the likeness of the British 2-year-old who was abducted in 1993 as his mother paid for groceries.

“If my mom turned right, I could have been alive today. Unfortunately, she turned left,” the childlike voice says, citing what James’s mother once said was one of her biggest regrets: If she had turned right, she would have seen her son being led away by the two 10-year-olds who later tortured and killed him

Yup

[–] [email protected] 25 points 1 year ago

The 2 biggest psychopaths join forces, true crime people, and tech bros

[–] [email protected] 24 points 1 year ago (1 children)

For fucks sake... AI continues to usher in a new age of human horror.

[–] azuth 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

True crime shows have existed with real (paid) actors in mainstream media for decades. Certainly made more money compared to 'content creators'.

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

There's a stark difference between reporting on or dramatizing a crime (often with family involvement) and creating deepfakes of dead kids to boost your social media presence.

[–] azuth 1 points 1 year ago

Yes, the people making the crime shows make real money.

It's also not a deepfake but quite fake looking AI generated stuff. And childlike synthesized voiceovers.

I frankly find making a whole tv production with actors,directors etc far more disturbing.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This is eerily similar to that episode of Black Mirror...

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

This is exactly that episode of Black Mirror. The use case is different, but the concept is identical.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 year ago

so fucked up

[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 year ago

Hey i know this one! Isn't a Black mirror episode?

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 year ago

You will never be allowed to die.

🙂

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 year ago

This is some radicalizing shit right here.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Reminds me of that Battlestar Galactica spinoff Caprica where the dad recreates his daughters life in a machine by recreating her life from her social media presence...

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This is the best summary I could come up with:


Now, some content creators are using artificial intelligence to recreate the likeness of these deceased or missing children, giving them “voices” to narrate the disturbing details of what happened to them.

TikTok’s guidelines say the advancement of AI “can make it more difficult to distinguish between fact and fiction, carrying both societal and individual risks,” and ask that users who share synthetic or manipulated media showing realistic scenes include a disclaimer noting that the content is not real.

Felix M. Simon, a communication researcher at the Oxford Internet Institute, said he was confident that the videos mentioned in this piece were produced using “one or several AI tools,” but could not say which software exactly.

“They appear to be created with some form of AI tools and bear some of the typical hallmarks of cheaper AI-generated videos,” such as an anime or comic-like aesthetic and polished skin, he said in an email.

Simon cautioned that the videos — which are often accompanied by dramatic or sorrowful music, or show children with scars and bloodied faces — “have the potential to re-traumatize the bereaved.”

Cory Bradford, a TikToker who has gained almost 1 million followers producing history videos, said that while he generally avoids using AI in his own posts, those who do are likely trying to boost engagement, especially on a platform where the audience skews younger.


I'm a bot and I'm open source!

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

Admitting you have a problem is the first step to recovery.

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

This just fuels my reasoning for not trusting us with AI. Raising awareness is fine and all, but re-creating a lost child only for them to tell you how they died is beyond fucked up.

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

More of that asked if they could not if they should stuff

shivers