geekwithsoul

Disagree strongly about all this being inevitable. And not taking a stand against mega-billion dollar companies enabling this is ridiculous, IMO.

To take your example of the photo industry, we have laws on the books against certain types of photography being either produced, in your possession, or sharing them. Why should GenAI be any different? If a server delivers you a nude image of someone without their consent and/or underaged, the company that owns that server has produced and distributed something actionable.

And sure, local models can and do exist, but hell, most people aren’t even willing to get off Windows and move to Linux - you think many folks are going to be paying for the hardware and developing/training their own local models? The same rules that keep beastiality/CP/etc (mostly) off the net can be used against them if they try and share them. And most importantly, by doing that, society says that kind of thing is not acceptable. Traffic laws aren’t enforced 100% of the time, but can you imagine what kind of hellscape it would be if we didn’t have them at all?

I think the thing that you’re missing is a teenager is generally not going to be able to make a photoshop that’s believable, whereas they can currently generate totally believable pictures and even video using GenAI. Sure, some will realize it must be AI, but some won’t and no matter what, the theoretical 13yo is going to feel just as threatened and violated.

The problem is that no regulation is ever going to work on the endpoints, so things like age-verification are pointless and an invasion of privacy. The only thing that will work is going after the companies, their training data, and the infrastructure. There will be stuff out of the country’s jurisdiction, but we already have laws handling that type of thing, and while imperfect, they do draw a line. And yes, local models will still be a thing, but you don’t enforce against the creation, you enforce against the trafficking of such images. If some modern day teenage da Vinci painted a near-photorealistic nude of a classmate, he can do that. But the minute he shares it, it comes under existing laws in sharing such images. Why should GenAI be treated any differently?

There are no guardrails that will work with AI, full stop. They keep talking about that in the hopes of avoiding regulation but the truth is that the models and the stolen data they’re trained on will keep popping up nudes as long as that was in the training data. So you either ban GenAI at scale (great for humanity but oops the economy) or you ban the use of training on data that includes nudes.

But the issue is not a better version of a photoshop of “some celebrity”, kids are doing this to each other because it’s so easy to do. Do you want to explain to a thirteen year old how it’s not a big deal if someone is passing around realistic nudes of them that were AI-generated? Will people always be dicks to each other? Of course, but that doesn’t mean as a society we should allow it to be so readily available that kids who aren’t even old enough to drive should have one-click access to it.

Personally I’d prefer if every data center disappeared tomorrow and AI companies were held liable for the theft they’ve orchestrated and the harm they’ve done. Short of that though, something needs to be done and it’s likely going to have to be regulations on the training data because their “guardrails” are shit and always will be. This isn’t inevitable and the only way to stop it is to start telling the AI companies, “No, you can’t do that.” If some clanker wanker in his parents basement wants to make an AI girlfriend, that’s on him.

If as few as 2% of reported rapes are false accusations but as recently as 2018, it was estimated that only 25% of rapes were reported to police, I think the argument that stuff like this “should be said” falls apart. When looking at false reports, you’re looking at essentially a statistical anomaly when looking at the total number of incidents of rape. Yes, it can be said to happen, but focusing on false reports actively discourages both men and women from reporting acts of sexual violence. The problem of people not feeling safe to report or that they wouldn’t be believed is a problem orders of magnitude greater in size than false reports.

I think it says a lot that some folks downvoted this despite it just being sourced stats of the level of sexual violence experienced by both men and women and the rarity of false reports. OP chose to post info about a case from more than 15yrs ago and didn’t even bother posting sources (probably because the age of the case would have tipped off how rare these types of situations are). Yes, these types of false reports are awful but the sheer number of incidents of rape against both men and women are staggering.

https://www.nsvrc.org/statistics/

“One in five women in the United States experienced completed or attempted rape during their lifetime”

“Nearly a quarter (24.8%) of men in the U.S. experienced some form of contact sexual violence in their lifetime.”

“Nationwide, 81% of women and 43% of men reported experiencing some form of sexual harassment and/or assault in their lifetime.”

“One in three female victims of completed or attempted rape experienced it for the first time between the ages of 11 and 17”

And

“The prevalence of false reporting for sexual assault crimes is low — between two percent and 10 percent.”

Sources for all this are linked in the site above.

She’s a former Senator who hasn’t been in office for a year. Even with this happening while in office, there’s nothing for a Senate Ethics Committee to do at this point.