11mo ago

The explicit AI-created images of Taylor Swift flooding the internet highlight a major problem with generative AI

www.fastcompany.com /91016953/deepfake-taylor-swift-ai-dangers

44 comments

People have been creating and posting realistic looking fake celebrity nudes for quite literally decades now, but now they're using AI and its suddenly a problem?
- I'm not sure if you noticed, but people who write for a living have suddenly started writing quite a lot about how technology that can write and generate media are bad.
  
  Which is so silly, because AI writing still needs a human editor. I write for a living and there tons of work that involves using AI as a tool to increase productivity rather than to replace writers completely... like photoshop didnt put photographers out of business it just changed the work flow.
- It's because a person can crank out a deep fake in 3 hours, and a crappy one in one. It never cropped up because... well lets be real it was a couple of weirdos that were doing it, unless it bubbles up from the dark corners of the internet you risk the Streisand effect by bringing attention to it.
  AI can crank out 40 in a minute. 7200 in three hours. That's an entirely different beast. The sheer mass and volume ramps up the odds of any image bubbling up from the dark corners of the web falling into the limelight and now this problem that wasn't big enough to merit thought is rearing up it's ugly head right in front of us.
  You can generate unique pictures of Taylor Swift faster than even Taylor swift can generate pictures of Taylor Swift. Within one hour of Taylor swift being seen with a man (and you have enough images of the man) you can create a dozen images of her on a date with that man and attempt to sell them to paparazzi.
  The problem is volume. Just like how email made everyone connected and allowed the Nigerian Prince scandal to occur.
  
  It's also not just limited to Taylor swift.
  People don't care now because people don't thin famous people should have any right to dignity, but their minds are gonna change really quickly when it's their sister, mother or daughter.
- I don't think many have gone viral on social media before or took less than 5 minutes to create. My uneducated guess is that previously this stuff would be in some niche forum in the recesses of the internet
  
  My uneducated guess is that previously this stuff would be in some niche forum in the recesses of the internet
  Not really. Back at the time there were public usenet groups specifically dedicated to the [hot actress of the day] fake porn.
- I can see why people are upset, I can agree that distribution of these images can be an issue, but this has the same energy of "I am mad that a certain picture of me is on the internet, I demand that they take it down." Sorry, that's not going to happen any time soon.
- You could be honest and acknowledge that there is a massive difference in time investment and skill required between the old way of creating fake porn of unconsenting people and the new way.
- It's now massively accessible and realistic. Yes, it's a problem.
  
  Google.com/images
  Damn look at that, been accessible for decades

I was a part of a Blursed AI group on Facebook that had been a lot of fun, but suddenly this week it first shifted to Taylor Swift porn, and then to alt-right MAGA shit very quickly. The comments on the Trump and MAGA related images were very on-board with it too. The change was so abrupt that I got the fuck out of there. Seemed orchestrated.

Here's a censored version of one of the images in question taken from another news article.
- Hahaha, that's glorious!

Platforms, including X, where the images were first shared
They also now have a dedicated platform at their disposal. Expect more trash to be posted first on X in the future.
- Like back at the time they had Usenet groups, rotten.com and a long list of other sites to post fake porn and other discutible content.
  Not that I am saying that is something right, just that is nothing new.

!https://i.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/facebook/000/038/932/tco_-_2021-11-24T113041.108.jpg

She probably has the money to sue each and every poster into oblivion.
- For what?
  
  The fuck is wrong with you?

The grover one was hilarious... Jus sayin

Is it a problem though? I mean, it just makes Rule34 pics that much easier to create. And you wouldn't want to kink-shame anyone, now, would you? Why is it always heterosexual men who are kink-shamed? Why is liking naked women a bad thing?
- Alright, I'll bite. To start, this is a real person that we are talking about. A real person who did not consent. Does that mean anything to you? The fact that there is a very real person that exists in very real life that has had this happen to them?
  Otherwise, I agree. Nothing wrong with the male libido.
  
  I don't need someone's consent to draw lewd fanart of them.
- So, this line of thought is not going to get AI fakes permitted, it's going to get rule 34 banned.
  We've been censoring sex shit for a long ass time, in case you haven't noticed. The recent trend of information freedom is not going to defeat that old religious puritanical bs, and people's wishes for privacy on top of it.
  Trump would shut that shit down fast. Conservatives want people reproducing, not masturbating, and he has christian supporters to keep in line, who do not like porn.

44 comments