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.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] federatingIsTooHard@lemmy.world 112 points 11 months ago

I don't know what a reasonable"protection" looks like here: the only thing foresee is 14 year old boys getting felonies, but no one being protected.

[-] Sharkwellington@lemmy.one 57 points 11 months ago

Right, there are plenty of reactive measures available but the only proactive measures are either restricting availability of the source photos used or restricting use of the deep fake tools used. Everything beyond that is trying to put the genie back in the bottle.

[-] interceder270@lemmy.world 52 points 11 months ago

At some point, communities and social circles need to be able to moderate themselves.

Disseminating nudes of peers should be grounds for ostracizing, but it really depends on the quality of people around you.

[-] MotoAsh@lemmy.world 19 points 11 months ago

That doesn't work. It's nothing but an inconvenience to not talk to your neighbors or those around you. They'd just get even worse and make even worse friends online.

Ostracization doesn't work. Ever. Period. If they're bad enough, banishment works. Ostracization is just literally ignoring the problem.

load more comments (7 replies)
[-] MagicShel@programming.dev 30 points 11 months ago

It's not possible to restrict deep fake technology at this point. It's out there. Accessible to everyone who wants it and has a computer at home.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[-] foggy@lemmy.world 91 points 11 months ago

Methinks this problem is gonna get out of fucking hand. Welcome to the future, it sucks.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 57 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Maybe it is just me, but its why I think this is a bigger issue than just Hollywood.

The rights to famous people's "images" are bought and sold all the time.

I would argue that the entire concept should be made illegal. Others can only use your image with your explicit permission and your image cannot be "owned" by anyone but yourself.

The fact that making a law like this isn't a priority means this will get worse because we already have a society and laws that don't respect our rights to control of our own image.

A law like this would also remove all the questions about youth and sex and instead make it a case of misuse of someone else's image. In this case it could even be considered defamation for altering the image to make it seem like it was real. They defamed her by making it seem like she took nude photos of herself to spread around.

[-] Dark_Arc@social.packetloss.gg 53 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

There are genuine reasons not to give people sole authority over their image though. "Oh that's a picture of me genuinely doing something bad, you can't publish that!"

Like, we still need to be able to have a public conversation about (especially political) public figures and their actions as photographed

load more comments (14 replies)
load more comments (13 replies)
[-] gandalf_der_12te@feddit.de 42 points 11 months ago

Honest opinion:

We should normalize nudity.

That's the only healthy relationship that we can have with our bodies in the long term.

[-] SuddenDownpour@sh.itjust.works 66 points 11 months ago

There's a pretty big fucking difference between normalizing nudity and people putting the faces of 14 year olds in porn video through deepfakes.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Basil@lemmings.world 57 points 11 months ago

This isn't even the problem going on, though? Sure, normalize nudity, whatever, that doesn't fix deep faked porn of literal children.

[-] adrian783@lemmy.world 33 points 11 months ago
load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] GiddyGap@lemm.ee 45 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Having spent many years in both the US and multiple European countries, I can confidently say that the US has the weirdest, most unnatural, and most unhealthy relationship with nudity.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] HiddenLayer5@lemmy.ml 42 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Maybe I'm just naive of how many protections we're actually granted but shouldn't this already fall under CP/CSAM legislation in nearly every country?

[-] atzanteol@sh.itjust.works 14 points 11 months ago

Would it? How do they prove the age of an AI generated image?

[-] DogMuffins@discuss.tchncs.de 17 points 11 months ago

By.... checking the age of the person depicted in the image?

load more comments (29 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (18 replies)
[-] Aceticon@lemmy.world 41 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

There might be an upside to all this, though maybe not for these girls: with enough of this people will eventually just stop believing any nude pictures "leaked" are real, which will be a great thing for people who had real nude pictures leaked - which, once on the Internet, are pretty hard to stop spreading - because other people will just presume they're deepfakes.

Mind you, it would be a lot better if people in general culturally evolved beyond being preachy monkeys who pass judgment on others because they've been photographed in their birthday-suit, but that's clearly asking too much so I guess simply people assuming all such things are deepfakes until proven otherwise is at least better than the status quo.

[-] yamanii@lemmy.world 46 points 11 months ago

Photoshop is a 40yo tool and people still believe almost every picture.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works 33 points 11 months ago

In previous generations the kid making fake porn of their classmates was not a well liked kid. Is that reversed now? On the basis of quality of tech?

[-] Omegamanthethird@lemmy.world 21 points 11 months ago

That kid that doodles is creepy. But deep fakes probably feel a lot closer to actual nudes.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] calypsopub@lemmy.world 31 points 11 months ago

So as a grown woman, I'm not getting why teenage girls should give any of this oxygen. Some idiot takes my head and pastes it on porn. So what? That's more embarrassing for HIM than for me. How pathetic that these incels are so unable to have a relationship with an actual girl. Whatever, dudes. Any boy who does this should be laughed off campus. Girls need to take their power and use it collectively to shame and humiliate these guys.

I do think anyone who spreads these images should be prosecuted as a child pornographer and listed as a sex offender. Make an example out of a few and the rest won't dare to share it outside their sick incels club.

[-] WoahWoah@lemmy.world 64 points 11 months ago

That's fine and well. Except they are videos, and it is very difficult to prove they aren't you. And the internet is forever.

This isn't like high school when you went to high school.

Agreed on your last paragraph.

[-] MargotRobbie@lemmy.world 18 points 11 months ago

Then nude leak scandals will quickly become a thing of the past, because now every nude video/picture can be assumed to be AI generated and are always fake until proven otherwise.

That's the silver lining of this entire ordeal.

Again, this is a content distribution problem more than an AI problem, the liability should be on those who willingly host these deepfake content than on AI image generators.

[-] finestnothing@lemmy.world 15 points 11 months ago

That would be great in a perfect world, but unfortunately public perception is significantly more important than facts when it comes to stuff like this. People accused of heinous crimes can and do lose friends, their jobs, and have their life ruined even if they prove that they are completely innocent

Plus, something I've already seen happen is someone says a nude is fake and are then told they have to prove that it's fake to get people to believe them... which is very hard without sharing an actual nude that has something unique about their body

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 35 points 11 months ago

So they do it and share it around to slut shame you

You try to find a job and they find porn of you

It’s a lot worse than you’re making it out to be when it’s not you that gets to make that decision

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] ExLisper@linux.community 27 points 11 months ago

I don't think the problem is that the girls and ashamed of the fake porn. The problem is not even that other kids will believe it. The problem is that kids will use it to mock, bully and ostracise them. It's not being shared as 'OMG, you're so hot I made fake sex tape with you, marry me". It's being shared as "you're a slut that does porn, everyone thinks you're a bitch, go kill yourself'.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] atzanteol@sh.itjust.works 27 points 11 months ago

You may not be representative of teenage girls.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[-] NightAuthor@lemmy.world 28 points 11 months ago

I wonder what the prevalence of this kind of behavior is like in countries that aren’t so weird about sex.

[-] atzanteol@sh.itjust.works 40 points 11 months ago

This has nothing to do with "being weird about sex" and everything to do with men treating women poorly.

You can expect this to be worse in nations where women don't have as many rights and/or where misogyny is accepted as part of life.

[-] NightAuthor@lemmy.world 15 points 11 months ago

Sounds plausible, we just abolished Roe, so…. It’s not looking great for the future of this issue in the US.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (54 replies)
[-] TheEighthDoctor@lemmy.world 25 points 11 months ago

What's the fundamental difference between a deep fake and a good Photoshop and why do we need more laws to regulate that?

[-] UlrikHD@programming.dev 24 points 11 months ago

Lower skill ceiling. One option can be done by pretty much anyone at a high volume output, the other would require a lot training and are not available for your average basement dweller.

Good luck trying to regulate it though, Pandora's box is opened and you won't be able to stop the FOSS community from working on the tech.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Treczoks@lemm.ee 22 points 11 months ago

The problem is how to actually prevent this. What could one do? Make AI systems illegal? Make graphics tools illegal? Make the Internet illegal? Make computers illegal?

[-] Jimmyeatsausage@lemmy.world 21 points 11 months ago

Make "producing real or simulated CSAM illegal?"

[-] Treczoks@lemm.ee 15 points 11 months ago

Isn't it already? Has it provided any sort of protection? Many things in this world are illegal, and nobody cares.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (21 replies)
[-] virock@lemmy.world 21 points 11 months ago

I studied Computer Science so I know that the only way to teach an AI agent to stop drawing naked girls is to... give it pictures of naked girls so it can learn what not to draw :(

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Gork@lemm.ee 20 points 11 months ago

President Joe Biden signed an executive order in October that, among other things, called for barring the use of generative AI to produce child sexual abuse material or non-consensual “intimate imagery of real individuals.” The order also directs the federal government to issue guidance to label and watermark AI-generated content to help differentiate between authentic and material made by software.

Step in the right direction, I guess.

How is the government going to be able to differentiate authentic images/videos from AI generated ones? Some of the AI images are getting super realistic, to the point where it's difficult for human eyes to tell the difference.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] leaky_shower_thought@feddit.nl 19 points 11 months ago

reading this, I don't really know what is supposed to be protected here to be deemed possible of protections in the first place.

closest reasonable one is the girl's "identity", so it could be fraud. but it's not used to fool people. more likely, those getting the pics already consented this is ai generated.

so might be defamation?

the image generation tech is already easily accessible so the girl's picture being easily accessible might be the weakest link?

[-] 0x0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 23 points 11 months ago

Not a lawyer, but I'll take a stab. Pretty sure it's illegal to create sexual images of children, photos or not. It's also illegal to use someone's likeness without permission, but admittedly this depends on the state in the US: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personality_rights

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 03 Dec 2023
467 points (95.2% liked)

News

23301 readers
1023 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