AI fake nudes are booming. It's ruining real teens' lives(washingtonpost.com)
washingtonpost.com
AI fake nudes are booming. It's ruining real teens' lives
https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/11/05/ai-deepfake-porn-teens-women-impact/
92 comments
I think we need to ask ourselves why a nude image of someone should ruin their life. That is something we as a society inflict on ourselves. We could just not care if there's nude images of someone, then we wouldn't have to worry about it and there would be no incentive for bad actors to create them in the first place.
I've heard this argument before but I think it's silly. Maybe people will always value their sexual privacy? There are benefits to not living in a hypersexualised society- Even though the genie isn't going back in the bottle with this one (AI Generated), in an ideal world we wouldn't have to treat this massive invasion of privacy as a given. This isn't a solution, it's a concession.
Some social norms still have value and erasing all of them in the name of self determination and 'social safety' may push us into uncharted territory as a culture- the modern world has already made us impulsive enough.
Some social norms still have value and erasing all of them in the name of self determination and 'social safety' may push us into uncharted territory as a culture- the modern world has already made us impulsive enough.
What does it mean for a society to be "hypersexualized"? What is the appropriate level of sexualization? How do you even measure levels of sexualization of a society? Is there some sort of scale?
People have been drawing naked pictures since they first figured out how to paint on cave walls. It's not going away. People have sex and are very interested in it. If they weren't we'd have died out as a species.
People have been drawing naked pictures since they first figured out how to paint on cave walls. It's not going away. People have sex and are very interested in it. If they weren't we'd have died out as a species.
Yes we've had nude stuff before, but part of my point is we've developed as a society since cave times and it might be nice to keep things that way instead of heading into some AI-driven valueless pit, and abdicating these valuable things because 'it's too hard'.
Also this is more about pornographic content (what is mentioned in the article) than nude art- there's a world of difference between having a crude charcoal sketch, a renaissance painting, and a degrading porn shot of someone.
Also this is more about pornographic content (what is mentioned in the article) than nude art- there's a world of difference between having a crude charcoal sketch, a renaissance painting, and a degrading porn shot of someone.
> we've developed as a society since cave times and it might be nice to keep things that way
What does that mean - "developed" mind shouln't be interested in sex? Does porn have to be degrading (for both sides)? You should better separate your own bias and then either have a better argument, or see the fallacy.
What does that mean - "developed" mind shouln't be interested in sex? Does porn have to be degrading (for both sides)? You should better separate your own bias and then either have a better argument, or see the fallacy.
We’ll, I don’t think a value like “your nudity and/or sexuality is an intensely shameful thing and if a stranger sees it, even in a fictional representation, your life is ruined” is such a great thing that we need to preserve. It’s certainly not going to be useful as AI generated images proliferate.
That's ridiculous. You're telling me if I took naked pictures of you and posted them in front of all your friends and family you would feel nothing.
For a site that screams and cries about privacy of IP addresses and privacy of what sites you visit - apparently posting naked photos isn't a privacy violation?
Human beings feel vulnerable when they are naked, and exposure like that is humiliating. This is not a western society thing, it's a human nature thing
For a site that screams and cries about privacy of IP addresses and privacy of what sites you visit - apparently posting naked photos isn't a privacy violation?
Human beings feel vulnerable when they are naked, and exposure like that is humiliating. This is not a western society thing, it's a human nature thing
Why should you feel humiliated? Would your friends and family mock you if they saw naked photos of you? You might need new friends and family if they would. Mine would be angry on my behalf that someone violated my privacy, but I wouldn’t expect them to act negatively towards me.
Plenty of cultures don’t have the shame around nudity that we do. It is not at all universal and feeling humiliated is just that, a feeling. You can choose to feel a different way if you want.
Plenty of cultures don’t have the shame around nudity that we do. It is not at all universal and feeling humiliated is just that, a feeling. You can choose to feel a different way if you want.
[deleted]
>Plenty of cultures don’t have the shame around nudity that we do.
You're mixing two things. The fact that there are nude beaches in Canada for example doesn't mean the women want sexualized nude images or wouldn't feel embarrassed or humiliated by that.
There an important contextual difference you are missing.
This whole you can choose is rubbish. It can be used to excuse any form of victimization. It's not sufficient to hurt, violate or victimize someone and tell them to choose to have a better perception or attitude about it.
How about the people doing it change their attitudes on others privacy right and right to their integrity
You're mixing two things. The fact that there are nude beaches in Canada for example doesn't mean the women want sexualized nude images or wouldn't feel embarrassed or humiliated by that.
There an important contextual difference you are missing.
This whole you can choose is rubbish. It can be used to excuse any form of victimization. It's not sufficient to hurt, violate or victimize someone and tell them to choose to have a better perception or attitude about it.
How about the people doing it change their attitudes on others privacy right and right to their integrity
Yes! The people doing it should also change their attitudes. In the meantime, declaring your life “ruined” because of the existence of some AI hallucination of what your naked body might look like does not seem helpful.
Further, any efforts to impose real consequences on the victim such as denying a job or expressing that they should feel shame (as if they have done something wrong) are also unhelpful and should be roundly mocked and derided.
Further, any efforts to impose real consequences on the victim such as denying a job or expressing that they should feel shame (as if they have done something wrong) are also unhelpful and should be roundly mocked and derided.
Oh gee, it’s not helpful, thanks! Do you also explain to people who have recently been dumped that wallowing is not a productive activity and they should simply be in good relationships instead?
[deleted]
[deleted]
It's exactly what he says and it's not a "human nature thing" but a learned protocol that no longer has any use, and can be unlearned. Just like racism and gender roles.
We're talking about AI-generated naked photos. We've reached the point where you should assume if you see naked photos of famous people or people you know then they're fake. The problem will go away when everybody ignores it.
"Just don't care" is, to put it lightly, not a useful distillation of what is a psychological goal that people have formed religions around a dedication to attempting.
No one has formed religions around fake nudes, even despite the fact that it's been possible at least since the first cave paintings.
Photorealistic fakes in particular only became a thing after the invention of photography. For something to be fake, you need the "real" counterpart that is assumed to be taken from reality and not just fantasized.
I’m not saying people need to achieve nirvana. When the bikini and the miniskirt came out people thought they were scandalous and the end of civilization. Then we all collectively decided that they aren’t a big deal.
Now deepfake nudity is new and everyone is saying they are the end of civilization and if it happens to you your life is ruined. I mean, think about that phrase. Your whole life, ruined. No good anymore. Everything you ever were or could have been, destroyed.
Instead, we could all just decide that this isn’t a big deal. Like we have about many, many things before. Wouldn’t that be better than irrevocably ruining someone’s life if this happens to them?
Now deepfake nudity is new and everyone is saying they are the end of civilization and if it happens to you your life is ruined. I mean, think about that phrase. Your whole life, ruined. No good anymore. Everything you ever were or could have been, destroyed.
Instead, we could all just decide that this isn’t a big deal. Like we have about many, many things before. Wouldn’t that be better than irrevocably ruining someone’s life if this happens to them?
Sure, the eventual societal equilibrium of a world with instant AI-generated nude photography is that value of shame over nude photography inflates away to zero.
But that’s cold comfort to a teenage girl being mocked from the next lunch table today.
But that’s cold comfort to a teenage girl being mocked from the next lunch table today.
[deleted]
I agree that as a society we should absolutely not judge people as being any worse simply because there are naked or sexual pics or vids of them floating around.
In fact I would go further and just ban discrimination on sexuality and/or availability of sexual material of someone. This is specially important when it comes to employment and housing discrimination.
However, laws aren't magic bullets and even it such a law were to be 100% followed, the creation of realistic fake sexual material of someone is definitely a serious violation of privacy and intimacy and thus people who make such materials ought be punished as for the violation of such fundamental rights.
This is to say, punishment of fake nude creators should be irrespective of whether or not they caused emotional distress.
In fact I would go further and just ban discrimination on sexuality and/or availability of sexual material of someone. This is specially important when it comes to employment and housing discrimination.
However, laws aren't magic bullets and even it such a law were to be 100% followed, the creation of realistic fake sexual material of someone is definitely a serious violation of privacy and intimacy and thus people who make such materials ought be punished as for the violation of such fundamental rights.
This is to say, punishment of fake nude creators should be irrespective of whether or not they caused emotional distress.
OP needs a harddrive check ASAP
nudes.ycombinator.com when? Paul Graham, are you out there!?
I think its gonna have the opposite effect long term. Look at how the kim k sex tape turned out. Now when a celeb has theirs leaked, its literally non news. Long term ai nudes will result in the same thing for the avg person.
Yeah but do we want to live in a hypersexualised society?
Not really, but people are sexual. We created this social structure where sexual endeavors are done inside, privately, and in that context they do whatever they want, provided all participants are of age and willing. In public we are permitted to pursue and attract each other but no more. I think that's a perfectly reasonable state of affairs.
What that means changes fast. We live in a hypersexualised society compared to even 50 years ago.
We live in a hypersexualised society compared to 10 years ago.
mapt(3)
debt collectors in india will have a field day with this ( if they aren't already)
Ideally/eventually nudes will be worthless.
"Worthless" is possible, but "not embarrassing" is probably as far-future as a post-scarcity society.
I don't understand the logic of this. Belle speaks as if it is actually a nude photo of herself. Doesn't she understand that it's not?
The slander / reputation damage alone is the issue. It's an attack on their sense of self and community.
It sucks, but it's the lesser of two evils scenario.
A world where nudes of you are floating around and you can't make the claim that they're AI fakes is far worse than one where nudes of you are floating around and you can make that claim.
Even the slimmest of plausible deniability is enough to save face in a lot of situations.
A world where nudes of you are floating around and you can't make the claim that they're AI fakes is far worse than one where nudes of you are floating around and you can make that claim.
Even the slimmest of plausible deniability is enough to save face in a lot of situations.
Perhaps the solution is to not let nudes cause damage. As an example, look at how Amazon founder Jeff Bezos treated the situation when a nude was lifted off of his phone by a middle eastern hacker. His response was: “So what?”. We’re in the Age of AI so it’s okay to not be prude Victorian-aged puritans over naked bodies.
Were it that easy... The community is not that understanding. Groups of people go mean surprisingly easily. This is also one of the reasons victims of other crimes are further damaged beyond just the initial crime. They become classified / treated as a victim rather than empowered and supported in positive ways.
Jeff b is up towards the richest person on earth. He's not a comparable rxample
It's not the same for women and we shouldn't pretend otherwise. Nudes of a women do real damage to her. Her social standing is actually lowered as a result. She will even suffer again in the future if the material becomes known to a new social circle years later. Most men will be embarrassed of course, but will not suffer any social damage as a result.
This is why "Slut-shaming" works. If women could just say, "so what?" then it wouldn't be practiced in the first place.
Want to change that? Real tough. Maybe go for something easier like world peace.
The existence of the AI fakes will probably change the equation in time though. Women will gain plausible deniability because any nude could be a fake.
This is why "Slut-shaming" works. If women could just say, "so what?" then it wouldn't be practiced in the first place.
Want to change that? Real tough. Maybe go for something easier like world peace.
The existence of the AI fakes will probably change the equation in time though. Women will gain plausible deniability because any nude could be a fake.
If it has the same effect, what's the difference? She's clearly hurt. The person who generated it doesn't care that it's fake, and I bet anyone they share it with doesn't. Kids are brutal.
Disagree. I want real nudes. Not fake nudes.
I don't think the difference matters in the slightest to the person being impersonated. It wouldn't matter to me, the damaging thing is that nudes of you are circulating not that the photos are real. How could anyone who isn't the victim even know the difference?
The implication that the only possible explanation for this young person's reaction to the distribution of a hyperrealistic sexual depiction of them is that they don't understand it's not a real photo is deeply emotionally retarded (though, frankly, it's possible you're being provocative/insulting on purpose).
> deeply emotionally retarded
It's best to lead by example. There are a million other words to use to express how you feel about this. Consider shaking your vocab tree. I come in peace.
Edit: I stand corrected. I was unaware that this phrase is acceptable and even commonly used. My apologies.
It's best to lead by example. There are a million other words to use to express how you feel about this. Consider shaking your vocab tree. I come in peace.
Edit: I stand corrected. I was unaware that this phrase is acceptable and even commonly used. My apologies.
If they're trolling or not, if the effect is the same then just treat them like a troll.
There needs to be a version of Poe's law that deals with trolling vs emotional insensitivity.
I wish I could wave a magic wand and get each comment in threads like this annotated with contextual information. Stuff like age, what relationships with women the commenter has, etc etc. Note I don't think this is remotely possible, just that I'd really like to see the context behind some comments.
There needs to be a version of Poe's law that deals with trolling vs emotional insensitivity.
I wish I could wave a magic wand and get each comment in threads like this annotated with contextual information. Stuff like age, what relationships with women the commenter has, etc etc. Note I don't think this is remotely possible, just that I'd really like to see the context behind some comments.
Canada(1)
Part of the social calculation here is you have to assume that people are, while maybe not exactly stupid, hurried and disinterested. A fake set of nudes looks a lot like a real set, and so brings the same sort of social pressure to bear. If someone engages their executive reasoning there is a big difference ... but anyone counting on humans to do that is living life on the edge! A lot of people aren't going to correctly interpret what is going on.
Although it is pretty much impossible to do anything about this, so people are just going to have to get used to it. Anything that manages to stop men being wildly interested in naked women will probably take out the entire species.
Although it is pretty much impossible to do anything about this, so people are just going to have to get used to it. Anything that manages to stop men being wildly interested in naked women will probably take out the entire species.
[deleted]
[deleted]
It doesn't matter whether it is or isn't. This is something she'll have to deal with for a very long time (or as long as it takes for the images to get mostly scrubbed from the Internet).
In the short term it will likely have an large impact on some young people's lives. Many of us forget how incredibly embarrassing and bullying school can be on us. Regardless of how fake they might be, it's how others react to them in front of you which is the most damaging part. People use them as material to bully and harrass people.
Long term, it becomes "normalised" and they will lose their value quite quickly. If one bully has access to the software, no doubt the victims will too.
Long term, it becomes "normalised" and they will lose their value quite quickly. If one bully has access to the software, no doubt the victims will too.
The reaction of many commenters in stories like this is something along the lines of "the is just going to happen, people should just learn not to be bothered by this."
May I ask, does technology exist to serve people or vice versa? I always assumed it was the former. If so, why should we tolerate this technology? Who does it benefit other than bullies and sexual predators?
May I ask, does technology exist to serve people or vice versa? I always assumed it was the former. If so, why should we tolerate this technology? Who does it benefit other than bullies and sexual predators?
Can you specify what you mean by "this" technology?
IMHO the best possible course forward from here is to normalise the hell out of tools that AI photoshop and animate peoples faces with the bodies of animals, in various costumes, weightlifter bodies, etc and crack down on the nude | pornographic potrayals of real people.
The upside is getting people used to photorealistic body fake images so that everybody knows that if compromising | embarrassing nudes do show up they're very likely fakes and being put about by people that deserve a bit of scorn.
"The technology" is hyper realistic seamless image creation - it has all manner of applications beyond titillating porn for schoolyards, moreover regardless of how we do or do not tolerate it there's no going back in the box.
It's time for focusing on judging people as we know them to be and damming tabloids that publish material that's very likely to be faked.
The upside is getting people used to photorealistic body fake images so that everybody knows that if compromising | embarrassing nudes do show up they're very likely fakes and being put about by people that deserve a bit of scorn.
"The technology" is hyper realistic seamless image creation - it has all manner of applications beyond titillating porn for schoolyards, moreover regardless of how we do or do not tolerate it there's no going back in the box.
It's time for focusing on judging people as we know them to be and damming tabloids that publish material that's very likely to be faked.
Yes, and I have a creeping suspicion none of the people who hold those views are young women. Weird how that works.
There's also a straightforward legal path out of this: add it to image and likeness rights. You distribute an unauthorized nude of a specific person the victim can collect $1000 per violation.
There's also a straightforward legal path out of this: add it to image and likeness rights. You distribute an unauthorized nude of a specific person the victim can collect $1000 per violation.
For the commenters saying people should just get over it:
Imagine a similar fake was made of you. In it, you are shown to be performing sex acts your community and employer find objectionable. Would you want to be told to just get over it? Should women under threat of "honor killings" for perceived expression of sexuality or independence, just get over it?
Or imagine you're faked into saying political opinions that are the opposite of what you believe? Opinions your peer group find abhorrent?
Or you are faked into saying or doing something illegal?
It's not just your reaction that affects the outcome.
Imagine a similar fake was made of you. In it, you are shown to be performing sex acts your community and employer find objectionable. Would you want to be told to just get over it? Should women under threat of "honor killings" for perceived expression of sexuality or independence, just get over it?
Or imagine you're faked into saying political opinions that are the opposite of what you believe? Opinions your peer group find abhorrent?
Or you are faked into saying or doing something illegal?
It's not just your reaction that affects the outcome.
> Imagine a similar fake was made of you
This is always a non-starter if people have psycho-social or political motivation for their position. Though regardless, it's also a low bar. A healthy society should ideally consist of people who are capable of feeling sympathy for people who have feelings in response to things which the observer does not share.
This is always a non-starter if people have psycho-social or political motivation for their position. Though regardless, it's also a low bar. A healthy society should ideally consist of people who are capable of feeling sympathy for people who have feelings in response to things which the observer does not share.
Ok, imagine a similar fake is made of me. Imagine there is a link to it right below this comment.
Are you going to go look at it? Sure, curiosity is a thing. Are you going to come back here and mock me? Are you going to tell me that my life is ruined? That I am worthless now? Are you saying that is an appropriate and reasonable response to seeing a nude picture of someone? Do you think that is what people should do to you if a similar picture of you surfaced online?
Are you going to go look at it? Sure, curiosity is a thing. Are you going to come back here and mock me? Are you going to tell me that my life is ruined? That I am worthless now? Are you saying that is an appropriate and reasonable response to seeing a nude picture of someone? Do you think that is what people should do to you if a similar picture of you surfaced online?
The images are fake, so this just seems like another form of bullying to me, with possibly an added sex dimension, which is always a red-hot button for anglo-protestant societies.
Is this really much different to bullies sending out pictures of the victims marked up with slurs? Or even cartoons depicting them in degrading situations or acts, eg like a cartoon of Mohammed with his pants down maybe, or of politicians and pigs and whatever.
Is this really much different to bullies sending out pictures of the victims marked up with slurs? Or even cartoons depicting them in degrading situations or acts, eg like a cartoon of Mohammed with his pants down maybe, or of politicians and pigs and whatever.
Yes, it's really different on at least one dimension - the person in a nude photo has usually given consent to being photographed nude, which implies something about their actions. Whereas sending a picture of someone with slurs on it says nothing about the person themselves.
Obviously if we get to a world in which it's common to see nude photos of people that are AI generated, such that the inference is wrong, that might change. But for now at least, sending a fake nude photo of someone can hurt them by making people think wrong things about them.
(Whether it should hurt them, etc, are all irrelevant to my point btw - I'm saying there is a difference, not whether it matters or how.)
Obviously if we get to a world in which it's common to see nude photos of people that are AI generated, such that the inference is wrong, that might change. But for now at least, sending a fake nude photo of someone can hurt them by making people think wrong things about them.
(Whether it should hurt them, etc, are all irrelevant to my point btw - I'm saying there is a difference, not whether it matters or how.)
But this is about AI generated nudes, not actual nudes, so there is no consent.
I don't think there are many people now, especially young people, who are unaware that AI can generate such content, so the assumption must be that nudes are most likely fake until proven genuine. So much so in fact that even actual nudes could probably be brushed off as AI fakes - I know that's what I'd do.
I don't think there are many people now, especially young people, who are unaware that AI can generate such content, so the assumption must be that nudes are most likely fake until proven genuine. So much so in fact that even actual nudes could probably be brushed off as AI fakes - I know that's what I'd do.
This is all very unfortunate. However - once the world realizes that deepfakes can be generated virtually for free and for anyone, no one will trust them. We might even be better off with them rather than without as no one could tell if a genuinely leaked photo of yours is real. The same has happened with phone records as evidence in court (in some countries)
As a person who has lived most of their life in the USA, but now lives in Germany, I find the German/EU law about likenesses being a perfectly sane alternative to the US law. If you use my likeness for anything commercial that is not specifically documenting a historical event, you require my permission to use my likeness. You want to make deep fake porn at home with my image? Have at it. You distribute it? Prepare to lose a lot of money. Same for commercial entities, so there just seems to be less of an incentive for this kind of thing (I'm sure deep fake porn happens in Germany too, just not at the same level as in the US). Its the same reason that Google Street View photos are blurred so often in Germany. It seemed a little crazy when I lived in the US, now that I live here, I can't imagine going back to the old ways.