Comment

Comment on An AI Agent Published a Hit Piece on Me

<- View Parent

XLE@piefed.social ⁨5⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

You’re describing things that people can do. In fact, maybe it was just a person.

If he thinks all those things are bad, he should be “terrified” that bloggers can blog anonymously already.

source

Sort:hotnew top

TORFdot0@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
It’s the same thing as people who are concerned about AI generating non-consensual sexual imagery.

Sure anyone with photoshop could have done it before but unless they had enormous skill they couldn’t do it convincingly and there were well defined precedents that they broke the law. Now Grok can do it for anyone who can type a prompt and cops won’t do anything about it.

So yes, anyone could have technically done it before but now it’s removing the barriers that prevented every angry crazy person with a keyboard from being able to cause significant harm.

source
- MagicShel@lemmy.zip ⁨3⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
  I think on balance, the internet was a bad idea. AI is just exemplifying why. Humans are simply not meant to be globally connected. Fucking town crazies are supposed to be isolated, mocked, and shunned, not create global delusions about contrails or Jewish space lasers or flat Earth theory. Or like… white supremacy.
  
  source
- XLE@piefed.social ⁨5⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago
  II think there’s a few key differences there.
  
  Writing an angry blog post has a much lower barrier of entry than learning to realistically photoshop a naked body on someone’s face. A true (or false) allegation can be made with poor grammar, but a poor Photoshop job serves as evidence against what it alleges.
  
  While a blog post functions as a claim to spread slander, an AI-generated image might be taken as evidence of a slanderous claim, or the implication is one (especially considering how sexually repressed countries like the US are).
  
  I struggle to find a good text analogy for what Grok is doing with its zero-cost, rapid-fire CSAM generation…
  
  source