Florencia (she/her) to Technology@lemmy.worldEnglish · 1 year agoGrok’s ‘spicy’ video setting instantly made me Taylor Swift nude deepfakeswww.theverge.comexternal-linkmessage-square56linkfedilinkarrow-up1478cross-posted to: hackernews@lemmy.bestiver.seghazi
arrow-up1478external-linkGrok’s ‘spicy’ video setting instantly made me Taylor Swift nude deepfakeswww.theverge.comFlorencia (she/her) to Technology@lemmy.worldEnglish · 1 year agomessage-square56linkfedilinkcross-posted to: hackernews@lemmy.bestiver.seghazi
minus-squareUlrich@feddit.orglinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up9·1 year agoAnd under any court at all, so is this. That’s the problem.
minus-square51dusty@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up13·1 year agohow can an ai bot pull a free speech defense? free speech is, ostensibly, reserved for people…?
minus-squareUlrich@feddit.orglinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up8·1 year agoAre you under the impression that the AI bot was not created by people?
minus-squareEcho Dot@feddit.uklinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up3·1 year agoSo? The manufacturer of the product is not responsible for how people use the product. Otherwise there would be no gun manufacturers anymore.
minus-squareUlrich@feddit.orglinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up4·edit-21 year agoThey are, however, responsible if the product they created does illegal things.
minus-square[object Object]@lemmy.calinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up9·1 year agoI disagree here, but I’m not a lawyer
minus-squareUlrich@feddit.orglinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up6·1 year agoBased on what? Who have you seen be convicted of making deepfake porn? Under what law?
minus-square[object Object]@lemmy.calinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up8·1 year agoI disagree that Grok appears as any form of satire here
minus-squareUlrich@feddit.orglinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up5·1 year agoNo one said it was. What I said was that it doesn’t matter if it’s satire or not, it’s still classified as free speech, until a court proves otherwise.
minus-squareSkyeStarfalllinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up3·1 year agoUhm, there have been plenty of cases of people getting in trouble for sharing deepfake porn yes. It’s sexual harassment. Well, at least over here in Europe, and it’s mostly been with teenagers, I don’t know the situation on the US But generally, making and sharing porn of real people is… well… that can very easily count as sexual harassement
And under any court at all, so is this. That’s the problem.
how can an ai bot pull a free speech defense? free speech is, ostensibly, reserved for people…?
Are you under the impression that the AI bot was not created by people?
So? The manufacturer of the product is not responsible for how people use the product. Otherwise there would be no gun manufacturers anymore.
They are, however, responsible if the product they created does illegal things.
I disagree here, but I’m not a lawyer
Based on what? Who have you seen be convicted of making deepfake porn? Under what law?
I disagree that Grok appears as any form of satire here
No one said it was. What I said was that it doesn’t matter if it’s satire or not, it’s still classified as free speech, until a court proves otherwise.
Uhm, there have been plenty of cases of people getting in trouble for sharing deepfake porn yes. It’s sexual harassment.
Well, at least over here in Europe, and it’s mostly been with teenagers, I don’t know the situation on the US
But generally, making and sharing porn of real people is… well… that can very easily count as sexual harassement