this post was submitted on 21 May 2024
78 points (97.6% liked)

Technology

3697 readers
408 users here now

Which posts fit here?

Anything that is at least tangentially connected to the technology, social media platforms, informational technologies and tech policy.


Post guidelines

[Opinion] prefixOpinion (op-ed) articles must use [Opinion] prefix before the title.


Rules

1. English onlyTitle and associated content has to be in English.
2. Use original linkPost URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.
3. Respectful communicationAll communication has to be respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints, and experiences.
4. InclusivityEveryone is welcome here regardless of age, body size, visible or invisible disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, caste, color, religion, or sexual identity and orientation.
5. Ad hominem attacksAny kind of personal attacks are expressly forbidden. If you can't argue your position without attacking a person's character, you already lost the argument.
6. Off-topic tangentsStay on topic. Keep it relevant.
7. Instance rules may applyIf something is not covered by community rules, but are against lemmy.zip instance rules, they will be enforced.


Companion communities

!globalnews@lemmy.zip
!interestingshare@lemmy.zip


Icon attribution | Banner attribution


If someone is interested in moderating this community, message @brikox@lemmy.zip.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.zip/post/15863526

Steven Anderegg allegedly used the Stable Diffusion AI model to generate photos; if convicted, he could face up to 70 years in prison

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Darkrai@kbin.social 10 points 1 year ago (5 children)

It seems weird that the AI companies aren't being held responsible too.

[–] bjorney@lemmy.ca 19 points 1 year ago

It's open source code that someone ran on their own computer, it's not like he used paid OpenAI credits to generate the image.

It also would set a bad precedent - it would be like charging Solomons & Fryhle because someone used their (absolutely ubiquitous) organic chemistry textbook to create methamphetamine

[–] Demigodrick@lemmy.zip 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Well the American way is not to hold the company accountable, I.e. school shootings, so yeah.

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'm pretty sure you can't hold a school liable for a school shooting

[–] stanleytweedle@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I think they were referring to the firearm manufacturer and\or seller.

[–] Demigodrick@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Still can't really hold them liable unless they deliberately sold a weapon to someone who legally was prohibited from having a weapon.

Shooting are more of a mental health and social media issue in my mind. The bigger question is why did someone feel the need to kill others?

[–] Demigodrick@lemmy.zip 0 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Still can’t really hold them liable unless they deliberately sold a weapon to someone who legally was prohibited from having a weapon.

That's a very American point of view though - America isn't holding those who create/sell tools that do bad things to account. If gun manufacturers were held responsible for how the things they created were used, you can bet anything suddenly they'd be hell of lot safer. Which is the exact same point about AI.

(Obviously not holding manufacturers/sellers to account is not an America-only issue, but this article is about AI and the USA so that's the example I'm using.)

The bigger question is why did someone feel the need to kill others?

As a non-American, I think the general question is why on earth does the general public need semi-automatic weapons. Or really, any weapons.

[–] ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 year ago

I mean we're also not suing Toyota or Stolichnaya to stop drunk driving. In America the onus is on you not to do the bad thing, not on the companies or government for not preventing you from doing it. In America if you kill someone it is your fault, not Ruger's.

Frankly I'm surprised it doesn't work that way in every country, if you sell a friend your old car and he hits an old lady years or months later would you get charged? That sucks.

[–] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 year ago

I guess its a cultural difference. America likes its guns.

[–] Leg@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I see the gun issue in America in the same light as the car issue. We're in way too fucking deep, and it's a part of our culture now. I hate both, but I acknowledge how difficult it is to do something about it.

[–] ASeriesOfPoorChoices@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

it's easy to do, people just don't wanna.

[–] Leg@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Making people do something they don't wanna do is actually fairly difficult. I personally don't drive or own a gun, but the people who do either tend to be pretty serious about it.

[–] JokeDeity@lemm.ee 6 points 1 year ago

Just to be clear, you guys think that any company that produces anything that ends up used in a crime should have criminal charges for making the product? Yeah, makes about as much sense as anything these days.

[–] Reddfugee42@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

Was Kodak ever held responsible for original CSAM?

[–] jonne 4 points 1 year ago

I think stable diffusion is an open source AI you can run on your own computer, so I don't see how the developers should be held responsible for that.