I disagree that Grok appears as any form of satire here
Comment on Grok’s ‘spicy’ video setting instantly made me Taylor Swift nude deepfakes
Ulrich@feddit.org 4 days agoBased on what? Who have you seen be convicted of making deepfake porn? Under what law?
panda_abyss@lemmy.ca 4 days ago
Ulrich@feddit.org 4 days ago
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.
SkyeStarfall@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 days ago
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
snausagesinablanket@lemmy.world 4 days ago
[Take it down act](On April 28, 2025, Congress passed S. 146, the TAKE IT DOWN Act, a bill that criminalizes the nonconsensual publication of intimate images, including “digital forgeries” (i.e., deepfakes), in certain circumstances.)
michaelmrose@lemmy.world 4 days ago
Is providing it over a private channel to a singular user publication?
I suspect that you will have to directly regulate image generation
snausagesinablanket@lemmy.world 4 days ago
Its already being done to help prevent fake CSAM.
That should have been standard from the start.
Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works 3 days ago
I don’t think anyone has any delusions that Twitter is private, not even DM’s.
michaelmrose@lemmy.world 2 days ago
It absolutely is private insofar as it is a channel between the software running on their end -> user who is operating the software. The lack of end to end encryption does not make it not private it makes it insecure which doesn’t speak whatsoever to the issue raised which is that creation of an image by a user isn’t likely to be considered publication until they share it.
It’s highly probable that keeping people from generating deep fake nudes requires additional law.
Ulrich@feddit.org 4 days ago
Hmm, interesting, thanks. Has anyone been charged or convicted with this law yet?
Cethin@lemmy.zip 3 days ago
Definitely not convicted. That’d be some crazy speed.
However, your insistence that it hasn’t happened yet so can’t happen is insane. There has to be a first case in which it hadn’t happened before.
Ulrich@feddit.org 2 days ago
It would be insane if that was what I had insisted, but that didn’t happen.