Police investigation remains open. The photo of one of the minors included a fly; that is the logo of Clothoff, the application that is presumably being used to create the images, which promotes its services with the slogan: “Undress anybody with our free service!”

  • aard@kyu.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    255
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    This was just a matter of time - and there isn’t really that much the affected can do (and in some cases, should do). Shutting down that service is the correct thing - but that’ll only buy a short amount of time: Training custom models is trivial nowadays, and both the skill and hardware to do so is in reach of the age group in question.

    So in the long term we’ll see that shift to images generated at home, by kids often too young to be prosecuted - and you won’t be able to stop that unless you start outlawing most of AI image generation tools.

    At least in Germany the dealing with child/youth pornography got badly botched by incompetent populists in the government - which would send any of those parents to jail for at least a year, if they take possession of one of those generated pictures. Having it sent to their phone and going to police for a complaint would be sufficient to get prosecution against them started.

    There’s one blessing coming out of that mess, though: For girls who did take pictures, and had them leaked, saying “they’re AI generated” is becoming a plausible way out.

    • alvvayson@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      128
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      There’s one blessing coming out of that mess, though: For girls who did take pictures, and had them leaked, saying “they’re AI generated” is becoming a plausible way out.

      Indeed, once the AI gets good enough, the value of pictures and videos will plummet to zero.

      Ironically, in a sense we will revert back to the era before photography existed. To verify if something is real, we might have to rely on witness testimony.

        • jetA
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          19
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Dwayne Elizondo Mountain Dew Herbert Camacho approves!

          Shit’s going to get real emotional

      • taladar@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        37
        ·
        1 year ago

        To verify if something is real, we might have to rely on witness testimony.

        This is not going to work. Just because images and videos become less reliable that doesn’t mean we will forget about the fact that eyewitness testimony is very unreliable.

        • Khanzarate@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          26
          ·
          1 year ago

          You say “forget” like it’s not still incredibly common as evidence.

          There’s lots of data showing that eyewitnesses aren’t reliable but that doesn’t mean courts actually stopped relying on it. Ai making another form of evidence untrustworthy will result in eyewitnesses taking its place.

      • JoBo@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        38
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        Indeed, once the AI gets good enough, the value of pictures and videos will plummet to zero.

        This just isn’t true. They will still be used to sexualise people, mostly girls and women, against their consent. It’s no different from AI-generated child pornography. It does harm even if no ‘real’ people appear in the images.

        Fucking horrible world we’re forced to live in. Where’s the fucking exit?

        • GreatGrapeApe@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          18
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          It is different than AI-generated CSAM because real people are actually being harmed by these deepfake images.

          • JoBo@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            15
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            I was replying to someone who was claiming they aren’t harmful as long as everyone knows they’re fake. Maybe nitpick them, not me?

            Reak kids are harmed by AI CSAM normalising a problem they should be seeking help for, not getting off on.

              • JoBo@feddit.uk
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                1 year ago

                Not getting beyond your first sentence here. I am not interested in what fucked up laws have been passed. Nor in engaging with someone who wants to argue that any form of child porn is somehow OK.

              • JoBo@feddit.uk
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                10
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                No I didn’t. Go nitpick someone else.

                Or better still, explain why you think AI-generated CSAM isn’t harmful. FFS

                • SharkEatingBreakfast@sopuli.xyz
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  8
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  Let’s be real here:

                  Sure, it’s not illegal. But if I find “those kinds” of AI-generated images on someone’s phone or computer, the fact that it’s AI-generated will not improve my view of that person in any possible way.

                  Even if it’s technically “legal”.

                  They tellin’ on themselves.

              • Ataraxia@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                1 year ago

                People who consume any kind of cp are dangerous and encouraging thar behavior is just as criminal. I’m glad that shit is illegal in most civilized countries.

          • JoBo@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            How is this place infested with so many fucking nonces?

            I made no claims about “more harm” so what imaginary claim are you referring to in your attempt to justify CSAM?

      • hansl@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        1 year ago

        A bit off topic, but I wonder if the entertainment industry as a whole is going to be completely destroyed by AI when it gets good enough.

        I can totally see myself prompting “a movie about love in the style of Star Wars, with Ryan Gosling and Audrey Hepburn as the leads, directed by Alfred Hitchcock, written by Vincent Hugo.” And then what? It’s game over for any content creation.

        Curious if I’ll see that kind of power at home (using open source tools) in my lifetime.

        • Benj1B@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          1 year ago

          I envisage a world where your browsing Netflix, and based on past preferences some of the title cards are generated on the fly for you. Then based on what you click, the AI engine warms us and generates the film for you in real-time. Essentially indistinguishable from the majority of Hollywood regurgitation.

          And because the script is just a series of autogenerated prompts, its like a choose your own adventure book, you can steer the narrative the way you want if you elect to. Otherwise it’ll be good enough to keep most monkey brains happy and you won’t even be able to tell the difference most of the time.

        • 🔍🦘🛎@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I know it’s impossible to perfectly predict future technology, but I believe AI will exist alongside traditional filmmaking. You’ll NEVER get something with the emotional impact of Up or Schindler’s List from an AI. You’ll be able to make fun action or fantasy movies though, and like you said, fully customized for the viewer. I imagine it’ll be like CGI vs traditional animation now - you only see the latter for passion projects, but for most uses, CGI works well enough.

        • ParsnipWitch@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          This is already starting to happen for digital illustration. With better models and enough images saved, you can already train a model to replicate the art created by an artist.

          • 𝕽𝖔𝖔𝖙𝖎𝖊𝖘𝖙@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Not so much replicate as simulate or produce art on the style of that artist.

            AI can’t replicate a piece of art unless it’s only trained on that one piece of art, at which point you don’t need an AI to make a copy anyway.

            If you trained an AI on two paintings by the same artist, it will never produce either original painting, only blends of the two.

      • Cruxifux@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Holy shit, I never thought of the whole witness testimony aspect. For some reason my mind was just like “well, nothing we see in videos or pictures is real anymore, guess everyone is just gonna devolve into believing whatever confirms their bias and argue endlessly about which pictures are fake and which are real.”

        Witness testimony and live political interactions are going to become incredibly important for how our society views “the truth” in world events in the near future. I don’t know if I love or hate that.

      • hardware26@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        Not necessarily, solutions can implemented. For example, footage from private security cameras can be sent to trusted establishment (trusted by the court at least) in real time which can be timestamped and stored (maybe not necessarily even stored there, encryption with timestamp may be enough). If source private camera and the network is secure, footage is also secure.

          • taladar@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I don’t think that will matter very much considering how many real time video modifications we can do already today. Not to mention synthesizing video before the time it is supposed to take place.

        • Benj1B@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Network security is a pretty big ask though - just look at how many unsecured cameras are around now. And once an attacker is in anything generated on that network becomes suspect - how do you know the security camera feed wasn’t intercepted, manipulated, or replaced altogether?

      • lambalicious@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        To verify if something is real, we might have to rely on witness testimony flagrancy.

        FTFY. Witness has never been that good a means to verify something is real.

      • sv1sjp@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        31
        ·
        1 year ago

        Thats why we need Blockchain Technology…

        Check Blockchain Camera for example: https://github.com/sv1sjp/Blockchain_Camera

        Abstract:

        
        Blockchain Camera provides an easy and safe way to capture and guarantee the existence of videos reducing the impact of modified videos as it can preserve the integrity and validity of videos using Blockchain Technology. Blockchain Camera sends to Ethereum Network the hash of each video and the time the video has been recorded in order to be able validate that a video is genuine and hasn't been modified using a Blockchain Camera Validation Tool.
        
          • sv1sjp@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            The point is to know the time that a video has been uploaded as well as the previous and next videos from it for uses as security cameras, accidents in cars etc to be able to trust a video. (More information can be found on paper).

            • taladar@feddit.de
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              15
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              1 year ago

              Not even that. It only allows you to verify that the source is identical to (the potentially wrong information) that was claimed at the time of recording by the person adding that information to the block chain. Blockchain, as usual, adds nothing here.

              • fiah@discuss.tchncs.de
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                6
                arrow-down
                8
                ·
                1 year ago

                Blockchain, as usual, adds nothing here.

                it can add trust. If there’s a trusted central authority where these hashes can be stored then there’s no need for a blockchain. However, if there isn’t, then a blockchain could be used instead, as long as it’s big and established enough that everybody can agree that the data stored on it cannot be manipulated

                • nudny ekscentryk@szmer.info
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  12
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  but false, nonconsensual nudes are not collectible items that need to have their authenticity proven. they are there to destroy peoples’ lives. even if 99% of people seeing your nude believe you it’s not authnetic, it still affects you heavily

            • nudny ekscentryk@szmer.info
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              yeah but the problem is mere existance of tools allowing pornographic forgery, not verifying whether the material is real or not

        • Gsus4@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          How is that better than an immutable database where you guarantee trust simply by gettin your own public hash receipt for the database every time you introduce a new item? Why obfuscate things by riding the “Blockchain” hype bandwagon?

            • Gsus4@feddit.nl
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              A nonprofit with multiple synchronized copies of the database and you can get your own copy, synchronize, fork it if you have the space, like a GitLab repository. Remember this is not for secure transactions and to prevent double-spending like a currency. It’s just an additive database. You don’t need to overkill with a blockchain.

    • Seudo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      1 year ago

      Same goes for any deepfake. People are loosing their shit because we won’t know what’s real and what’s not!.

      We should have been teaching critical thinking a generation ago. Sagan was pleading for reform in the 90s. We can start teaching the next generation how to navigate the Information Age. What we can’t do is make the world childproof.

    • Cethin@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah, what I see happening is people end up not caring as much because there’s going to be so much plausible AI generated crap that any real stuff will be lost in the noise.

    • Turun@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Quelle für das angesprochene Gesetz bitte. Das will ich im Detail lesen.

    • taladar@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      81
      ·
      1 year ago

      In the long term that might even lead to society stopping their freak-outs every time someone in some semi-sensitive position is discovered to have nude pictures online.

  • rufus@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    67
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Interesting. Replika AI, ChatGPT etc crack down on me for doing erotic stories and roleplay text dialogues. And this Clothoff App happily draws child pornography of 14 year olds? Shaking my head…

    I wonder why they have no address etc on their website and the app isn’t available in any of the proper app-stores.

    Obviously police should ask Instagram who blackmails all these girls… Teach them a proper lesson. And then stop this company. Have them fined a few millions for generating and spreading synthetic CP. At least write a letter to their hosting or payment providers.

      • rufus@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I just hope they even try to catch these people. I’ve tried to look up who’s behind that and it’s a domain that’s with name.com and the server is behind Cloudflare. I’m not Anonymous, so that’s the point at which I’m at my wits’ end. Someone enraged could file a few reports at their abuse contacts… Just sayin…

        There’s always the possibility they just catch the boy and just punish him. Letting the even more disgusting people in the background keep doing what they want. Because it would be difficult to get a hold of them. This would be the easiest route for the prosecuters and the least efficient way to deal with this issue as a whole.

      • rufus@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        I didn’t follow how the story turned out that closely. I think it was a schoolmate who did this. I kinda split up my answer because I think if a kid/minor is the offender, it’s not yet too late to learn how to behave (hopefully). But blackmailing people with nudes is a bit more than the usual bullying and occasional fight between boys we did back in the day. I trust some judge has a look at the individual case and comes up with a proper punishment that factors this in.

        What annoys me is the people who offer this service. Advertise for use-cases like this and probably deliberately didn’t put any filters in place not even if it’s pictures of minors. I think they should be charged, fined and ultimately that business case should be banned. I (anonymously) filed a complaint, after writing that comment in September. But they’re still online as of today.

        So in my opinion the kid should be taught a lesson and the company should pay for this and be closed for good.

  • them@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    54
    arrow-down
    13
    ·
    1 year ago

    Yes, lets name the tool in the article so everybody can participate in the abuse

      • DarkThoughts@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        1 year ago

        Considering that AI services typically cost money, especially those advertising adult themes, it kinda does do support the hosters of such services.

        • RaivoKulli@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          1 year ago

          Then again, naming and shaming puts pressure on them too. But in the end I doubt it matters. Those who want to use them will find them.

          • DarkThoughts@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Of course, which isn’t even the problem but rather people using the edited pictures for things like blackmail or whatever. From a technical standpoint it isn’t too dissimilar to the old photoshopping. Face swapping can probably even provide much higher quality results, especially if you have a lot of source material to pull from (you want like matching angles for an accurate looking result). Those AI drawn bodies often have severe anatomical issues that make them very obvious and look VERY different to their advertisement materials.

          • 30p87@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            True. Especially as just googling ‘undress AI free’ yields tons of results which may be less or more legit.

    • Rediphile@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      You can literally Google ‘AI nude generation tool’ and get multiple results already. And I do sort of agree with you as I’m not sure how naming this specific tool was necessary or beneficial here. But I don’t think not naming it is going to prevent anyone interested in such a tool from finding one. The software/tool itself is (currently) not illegal.

  • rayyyy@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    48
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    1 year ago

    The shock value of a nude picture will become increasingly humdrum as they become more widespread. Nudes will become so common that no one will batt an eye. In fact, some less endowed, less perfect ladies will no doubt do AI generated pictures or movies of themselves to sell on the internet. Think of it as photoshop X 10.

      • andrai@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        64
        arrow-down
        12
        ·
        1 year ago

        I can already get a canvas and brush and draw what I think u/DessertStorms looks like naked and there is nothing you can do about it.

        • ParsnipWitch@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          10
          ·
          1 year ago

          The lack of empathy in your response is telling. People do not care for the effect this has on teenage girls. They don’t even try to be compassionate. I think this will just become the next thing girls and women will simply have to accept as part of their life and the sexism and objectification that is targeted at them. But “boys will be boys” right?

          • Seudo@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            The number of people offering practical solutions instead of knee jerk feels… oh the humanity!

            • ParsnipWitch@feddit.de
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Demanding people to just accept that this will happen and they just shouldn’t feel bad about it is not a practical solution.

                • ParsnipWitch@feddit.de
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Because this is not a solution for the people who are actually victimized. It’s just a solution for the people around those who are victimzed, so that they don’t need to change anything or talk (or listen) about it.

        • DessertStorms@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          15
          arrow-down
          28
          ·
          1 year ago

          You’re not making the point you think you are, instead you’re just outing yourself as a creep. ¯_(ツ)_/¯

      • taladar@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        37
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Photoshopped nude pictures of celebrities (and people the photoshopper knew personally) have been around for at least 30 years at this point. This is not a new issue as far as the legal situation is concerned, just the ease of doing it changed a bit.

      • Jax@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        29
        ·
        1 year ago

        Have you ever posted a photo on Facebook or Instagram?

        If the answer is yes, congratulations! You gave consent.

        • Black616Angel@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          15
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          1 year ago

          Please show me where exactly the terms and conditions mention the production and publication of ai generated nudes on those sites.

          Also eww, I would not want to be near you in real life.

          • Jax@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            17
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            You give them free reign to do literally whatever they want with your images the moment you post them. They OWN YOUR PHOTOS. The only reason you don’t know about it is because you’re fucking stupid and don’t read their terms of service.

            Signed: person who stopped using sites like Facebook and Instagram for this reason.

            Edit: Sorry, I realized that reading isn’t your strong suit which is why you demanded I sift through their ToS for you. It’s under the privacy section of Meta’s terms of service. Anything you post that is public immediately grants them the rights to your image.

            You ever put an image on Tinder through Facebook, congrats: consent achieved.

            I genuinely do not care if you are aware or otherwise. Your comment proves you’re fucking dumb, and deserve your images being used against you for not protecting yourself from predatory social media sites.

            • ParsnipWitch@feddit.de
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Jep, women and girls should just stay away from social media. Also, do not appear on other types of photos. Best stay under a blanket all times, since if some guy sees your face you gave him consent to do whatever he likes with that. You really are a pathetic human being if you don’t see the problem with your mindset.

              • Jax@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                God you people are fucking dumb.

                It is in their TERMS OF SERVICE. IF YOU ACCEPT THEIR TERMS OF SERVICE WITHOUT READING THEM, YOU DO NOT GET TO COMPLAIN. THIS IS NOT NEW, YOU ARE JUST STUPID.

            • Black616Angel@feddit.de
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              You are right, they own my photos, this of course doesn’t grant them the right to do anything with it and it as well doesn’t give someone else the right, but what do you know? You are some lonely little sit harassing others online.

              Delete your CSAM collection and then yourself please. Do something for us all, thanks.

              • Jax@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                1 year ago

                Jesus christ, you’re a fucking idiot. Maybe if you went through English class without writing every report through sparknotes you’d have developed the critical thinking required to understand what a TERMS OF SERVICE agreement is.

                It’s not too late, you can always go back to school. Although, reading your replies, you’re still too fucking dumb to gain anything from it.

                • Black616Angel@feddit.de
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Wow, you have to be one of the most stubborn, stupid, insolent, arrogant, self-absorbed assholes, I ever had the displeasure of exchanging words with.

                  Eat a dick!

  • Margot Robbie@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Banning diffusion models doesn’t work, the tech is already out there and you can’t put it back in the box. Fake nudes used to be done with PhotoShop, the current generative AI models only makes them faster to make.

    This can only be stopped on the distribution side, and any new laws should focus on that.

    But the silver lining of this whole thing is that nude scandals for celebs aren’t really possible any more if you can just say it’s probably a deepfake.

    • PolarisFx@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yea, with 15 good headshots from different angles I can build a LoRA for anybody, hell Civit is full of celebrity LoRA’s.

      Mage.space already had to switch to SFW because people were generating CP. The past couple weeks I’ve been playing with stable diffusion and some of the checkpoints easily generate content that I had to delete because they looked REALLY young and it creeped me out.

    • GCostanzaStepOnMe@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      Other than banning those websites and apps that offer such services, I think we also need to seriously rethink our overall exposure to the internet, and especially rethink how and how much children access it.

      • MadSurgeon@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        We’ll need an AI run police state to stop this technology. I doubt anybody has even the slightest interest in that.

        • GCostanzaStepOnMe@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          11
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          We’ll need an AI run police state to stop this technology.

          No? You really just need to ban websites that run ads for these apps.

  • negativeyoda@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    1 year ago

    Can this come full circle so I can shirtcock it and later say, “dog, that’s AI” when people post pictures?

    • Gsus4@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yea, that’s the solution…or niqabs for everyone, lol.

    • benni@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t know about AI nudes. But with normal AI generated pics, they have a specific style and genericness to them. Don’t get me wrong, many AI generated pictures are hard to distinguish from real photographs. But on the other hand, many real photographs are easy to distinguish from AI generated pics. So you’d probably need to take the nudes in a specific way to have plausible deniability.

  • Sigmatics@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    The only thing new about this is that the photos are probably more realistic, but still fake. Apps to do this existed before GenAI was a thing

  • YurkshireLad@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Maybe something will change as soon as people start creating and distributing fake AI nudes of that country’s leaders.

    • Risk@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      1 year ago

      Honestly surprised this didn’t happen first.

      Be a great way to discredit politicians in homophobic states, by showing a politician taking it up the arse.

    • TheGreenGolem@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      You know the old joke: if we could do anything with just our eyes, the streets would be full of dead people and pregnant women.

    • uxia@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      Lol then people will probably start assuming anyone wearing that technology is a pedophile and/or disgusting creep.

        • bitsplease@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          I don’t see how it won’t, people are always going to be sketched out by the notion that the guy across from you could be recording you or taking pictures without your knowledge

          Yeah phones can kind of do the same, but it’s a lot harder to hide with a phone

          • nicoweio@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Assuming Apple locks down their device enough, it should make it pretty clear when it’s recording. Whether this notion becomes generally known and accepted, though, is a question in itself.

            • bitsplease@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              People already don’t trust the webcams on their own machines to not record them, even when they have hardwired indicator lights, I really doubt that they’ll suddenly trust tech that most people have no experience with to be frank.

              I don’t think it’ll be an issue with the Apple Vision Pro specifically though, it’s not like the Google Glass in that it’s super convenient to wear when you go out on a regular basis. No one but an absolute weirdo is going to sit down at the bar wearing his Apple Vision Pro, it’d be like bringing your Quest 2 lol

          • nicoweio@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Sorry, I meant Google Glass. People were weirded out and the term “Glasshole” was coined. Basically what the comment above described.

    • Skates@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      40
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      (it will be a man)

      I don’t even know whether to upvote or downvote your comment because I can’t figure out if you’re trying to say that only a man would do something like this, or that no woman is technically proficient enough to do this.

      Have a downvote for the ambiguity.

  • danhab99@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    I tried the AI with a pic of me. It was incredibly inaccurate and gave me something between a dick and a vagina. Nothing truly damaging.

  • Aetherion@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Better don’t stop posting your life into the internet, this would push people to create more child porn! /s

  • electrogamerman@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    This all would not be a problem if people appreciated nudism more. Im not even talking about people being nudists, just people accepting nudists. Once you take away the nudism taboo, all these photos won’t matter at all