this post was submitted on 21 Apr 2024
311 points (97.8% liked)
Technology
59446 readers
4185 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
What about those of us who think deep fakes are no different than someone drawing a bad fan porno fiction?
I'd point you to the space episode of Black Mirror.
Personally, don't know. I'm pretty liberal and I'd be flattered if someone had deep fake nudes of me.
But I understand the counter argument.
It's a weird moral conundrum.
The scale and ease of use is the real problem. Anyone who would draw pictures of women they know naked to jerk off to is obviously a creep. But that's a creep who had to spend years of their lives practicing to draw realistic bodies. Not literally any person who happens to have a folder full of their Facebook friends.
Like roll the clock back and pretend this is about the dangers of cars running people over. When there is only a couple cars out there it's easy to say "But what about the horses that run people over", but fast forward to today and death by auto wildly outranks death by horse. Horses and car deaths are still a problem, but citing horses as to why car deaths aren't so bad is ludicrous, disengenerous and asinine
Two things can be a problem, but easily accessible deep faking by anyone with a boner and a spare minute is not the same to someone spending hours over a suacy oil painting.
I would recommend to get some empathy, not bad in general.
To me it’s not about empathy, it’s about doing what you want as long as your not harming anyone.
And I believe if I draw some picture of (let’s say you) and keep it to myself (or with those who consented to seeing said drawing), there is nothing wrong with that.
I doubt you would agree though.
Edit: for future readers, please note that responding to a logic argument with saying “what about empathy”, is actually the logical fallacy “appeal to emotion”.
Downvote away if you like.
Sure. But that's not what happens with deepfake porn sites? They are public.
Wouldn’t a content warning take care of that? As long as every user visiting knows they are consenting to see “bad porn drawings”, it’s still the situation I originally described.
Sure, what ever helps you masturbate. But again - you can also have empathy with people who it has an effect on, listen to why and how and masturbate to all the other porn out there. But you wont since you lack basic empathy or maybe the whole hurting people is what gets you off in the first place. Not judging.
Don’t know where I claimed this or implied this.
Idk how you could possibly know or judge that someone has or doesn’t have empathy for other human beings while discussing personal freedoms that don’t affect others.
I guess strawman is the only way to respond to simple logic of “if your actions don’t hurt anyone, it’s fine”
I’m good with ending this convo here, have a nice day.
Not seeing how your actions are hurting others, despite them even telling you - is mostly related to lack of empathy. Not that complicated, just simple logic.
Again, creating said artwork would be the action which does not hurt anyone.
Your probably claiming others would use said artwork to hurt people.
That sucks and I don’t support that. But imo one person doing something wrong is on them, it doesn’t make the artwork creator who did nothing wrong guilty.
If I were to make a hammer and sell it, then someone else uses the hammer to kill someone, I wouldn’t be guilty.
Dude, I thought you left?
Again if you would have empathy you could just listen to people, what and how they are hurt by deepfakes and understand what the problem is. Since you don't have empathy, nothing I will tell you would make any sense for you.
Your right, the last few comments have been going in circles and I’m probably wasting my time. Will leave this bad faith argument now. Doubt you will ever know what an appeal emotional logical fallacy is.
Still here?
Again, we are talking about empathy and you clearly show that you don't get it. Which was my point to begin with. Sorry mate to be the one bringing you the news.
It's not about what you think, if a future employeer doing extensive checks on you thinks it's real then that can have real world consequences for you.
Also you are thinking about deepfakes of today and not the deepfakes of 5 years from now or 10 years from now. It will get to a point where no one will be able to tell if they are fake or real.