467
submitted 11 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

A mother and her 14-year-old daughter are advocating for better protections for victims after AI-generated nude images of the teen and other female classmates were circulated at a high school in New Jersey.

Meanwhile, on the other side of the country, officials are investigating an incident involving a teenage boy who allegedly used artificial intelligence to create and distribute similar images of other students – also teen girls - that attend a high school in suburban Seattle, Washington.

The disturbing cases have put a spotlight yet again on explicit AI-generated material that overwhelmingly harms women and children and is booming online at an unprecedented rate. According to an analysis by independent researcher Genevieve Oh that was shared with The Associated Press, more than 143,000 new deepfake videos were posted online this year, which surpasses every other year combined.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Lmaydev@programming.dev 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Didn't say jail, you did. I in fact didn't talk about punishment at all.

But there has to be consequences.

If kids steal we don't just throw them straight in jail. But it is a possible consequence.

We're also talking about 14 year olds not literal children.

[-] Steve@startrek.website 8 points 11 months ago

14 year olds are absolutely literally children

[-] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

Oh so why are red states demanding that they be mothers?

[-] yamanii@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

What's with remnants of reddit and pretending teenagers are kids? They aren't, they are teens, they can even make babies with themselves, drive and vote.

[-] NightAuthor@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

Illegal necessarily implies punishment, as far as I understand.

Also, 14 year olds are children. But the trajectory of this conversation is clear, and it’s not going anywhere.

[-] Lmaydev@programming.dev 7 points 11 months ago

Well that's the result when you put words in peoples' mouths, instead of trying to have a discussion.

[-] NightAuthor@lemmy.world -2 points 11 months ago

If I don’t make any logical steps given the limited words provided in a conversation, then communication becomes impossibly slow. Therefore i feel that I have to make such logical steps. Because text based communication, in the current times, is a bandwidth constraint on the passage of concepts between two human minds. In this case, because of said bandwidth constraint existing between your brain and mine, I made the step and assumed that when you mention making something illegal, that you meant that governments should prohibit the act and do as they (in my understanding) typically do and enforce said prohibition with threat of incarceration. That may have been an oversimplified view of the judicial system, there are other means of enforcement, but I’m only really familiar with the idea of children either being incarcerated or maybe given community service, but I usually (I’m not sure why) given to believe that community service isn’t usually a statutory punishment, but rather a discretionary adjustment that a judge can afford someone. It’s also worth noting that I have concerns about the way in which minorities are disproportionately sentenced, procecuted, and ultimately harmed by the judicial system. Concerns which bias my thoughts when the subject is raised. But I’d like to make clear that I’m using the term bias a bit more strictly, as in every human has a bias against/for basically everything.

So, if I may take another leap, it seems you’re implying that you are specifically talking about me, and not using “you” in the general sense. And I’ll assume you’re actually referring to this current conversation, and claiming that I caused this outcome because I put words in your mouth. Oh, and by that you’re saying (again, these are my assumptions) that I’m claiming that you said something which you never actually said.

So maybe, if you take some logical leaps for the sake of me being able to type this in my life time, you can see that I was not necessarily trying to maliciously misconstrue what it is that you were saying.

And in case it’s not clear, the above is conveyed with mild contempt for you.

[-] Lmaydev@programming.dev 2 points 11 months ago

It's actually called a straw man logical fallacy.

You exaggerated what I said and then attacked your exaggeration.

[-] NightAuthor@lemmy.world -1 points 11 months ago

Are you familiar with the fallacy fallacy?

[-] Lmaydev@programming.dev 2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Oh so you're one of those people who think anyone who points out a logical fallacy should be sent straight to prison.

That's absolutely stupid, no idea how you can genuinely think that.

It's obvious this discussion won't go anywhere with you believing crazy stuff like that, so let's just leave it here.

[-] NightAuthor@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

How can you expect a conversation to go anywhere when you’re fighting w a stawman. I never made any claims what so ever about fallacy fallacies.

[-] lolcatnip@reddthat.com 0 points 11 months ago

What sort of "consequences" are you talking about that aren't punishment?

this post was submitted on 03 Dec 2023
467 points (95.2% liked)

News

23311 readers
1111 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS