Comment on One in four unconcerned by sexual deepfakes created without consent, survey finds
HubertManne@piefed.social 1 day ago
I can see this. Someone had a comment in another thread that if its for private use its fine and I sorta get that but someone else made the point that ai should not have the info really. So people should really be concerned that ai can have image or video or audio input by users. They should have to use text or non image docs. If someone wants to deepfake and ex they will need to describe them.
Ashtear@piefed.social 1 day ago
Yes, if it was on a locally-hosted generative model, I wouldn’t be bothered if someone did this in my likeness. That wouldn’t be meaningfully different than using Photoshop to fake it ten years ago.
Passing it around to their friends and gods know whom else is still just as reprehensible though.
HubertManne@piefed.social 1 day ago
Yeah and photoshop things had the issue with passing around to. AI does have the issue of input being integrated into other output though. If someone asks for a redhead will it reference redheads various randos inputed into the system. Honestly whats scarier is if someone wants to touch up photos of their family and ai takes that as human images that make sense to use as reference for other porn material requests.
Ashtear@piefed.social 1 day ago
That’s why I said local models. They aren’t automatically taking outputs and training updates on them.
And yeah, we’ve all already had our likenesses folded in somewhere. That’s the bigger problem here.
HubertManne@piefed.social 1 day ago
ah. missed that. I think my brain mixed it in as part of private use rather than a private lm instance.