‘I Don't Believe Deepfakes Should Be Regulated,' Says Man Who Is the Reason Deepfakes Should Be Regulated : theonion

[–] FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world 19 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I hate that I still have to check out obvious satire to make sure it really is satire now.

[–] Potatos_are_not_friends@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago

The stock photo guy absolutely looks like the kinda person who would make some very... Uncomfortable deepfakes.

[–] shrugal@lemm.ee 12 points 2 years ago

Or did he?!

[–] Skelectus@suppo.fi 10 points 2 years ago

Lots of onions eaten in this comment section.

[–] kibiz0r@midwest.social 8 points 2 years ago

Ethan is showin up big time in these comments. Holy shit.

[–] shiveyarbles@beehaw.org 8 points 2 years ago

Just like Trump, everything he complains about is projection.

[–] Thcdenton@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago

You know what? Fuck it. I'm not even into deepfakes. If someone wants to blast rope to me getting railed by waluigi then have at it. The future is now old man.

[–] RizzRustbolt@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago

Ladies...

[–] RealFknNito@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

I don't use or frequently browse deep fakes and I don't think they should be regulated. Governments have never regulated the internet in a way that didn't have cascading negative effects elsewhere.

[–] LarmyOfLone@lemm.ee 0 points 2 years ago

I believe it's a power grab. The more you regulate or force licensing costs on AI tools the harder it is to use without having large capital.

Meaning those with all the money can use AI while regular people or small companies or startups can't.

[+] Catastrophic235@midwest.social -10 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

"Don't you know that our plans have your interest - not ours - in mind"?

Unironically if it's a struggle to understand why regulation of AI is far more dangerous than AI than I have a pair of boots to sell you. They go on your neck, and you'll be the one who asks for them to go there. But don't worry, they'll keep you safe, and if you don't unconditionally beleive me you are somehow wrong.

[+] hemko@lemmy.dbzer0.com -35 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Only people who believe they'd benefit from regulating deepfakes are some high profile and/or internet narcissists.

"Boohoo someone made a video of Trump's hemorrhoids and Biden licking them" Everyone already knows you can easily fake some video without using "AI" for it, we have a whole fucking industry for it pumping hundred movies out every Saturday. We already know you shouldn't believe everything you see.

[–] 520@kbin.social 26 points 2 years ago (4 children)

Goes a bit beyond that nowadays. Deep fakes can be used to create false evidence for example

[–] DrownedRats@lemmy.world 30 points 2 years ago (3 children)

Deepfakes are already being used on an industrial scale for scams and conning people.

It's not a case of them needing regulating because they offend peoples sensibilities, it's because they're actively being used to harm people.

[–] FiskFisk33@startrek.website 6 points 2 years ago

how would more regulation help? what you are talking about is already illegal

[–] General_Effort@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago

Yeah, fraud used to be such a fun pastime for the whole family. Now we need to regulate it. Technology ruins everything.

[–] loobkoob@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago

The past month or so I've started encountering quite a few deepfakes on dating sites. I honestly can't tell they're deepfakes just by looking; the only reason I've realised tell is because they were very obviously Instagram model photos. I reverse image searched them to find where they were taken from and confirm my suspicions that the profile's using stolen photos, only to find that the original photos aren't quite the same. It'll be the exact same shot with the same body but a different face, and with identifying tattoos removed, moles adds, etc.

If they weren't obvious modelling shots that made me want to reverse image search them, I wouldn't have known at all. It makes me wonder how many deepfaked images I've encountered on dating sites already and just not known about because they've been fairly innocuous-looking photos...

[–] FiskFisk33@startrek.website 7 points 2 years ago (2 children)

thats already illegal

[–] 520@kbin.social 9 points 2 years ago (1 children)

In a courtroom sure. What about putting it on YouTube?

[–] BakerBagel@midwest.social 7 points 2 years ago (1 children)

So you have no issues with me distributing deepfakes of you burning crosses across your neighborhood?

[–] FiskFisk33@startrek.website 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I'm not saying deepfakes should not be regulated.

I'm saying the examples are poor because scamming people is already illegal.

[–] BakerBagel@midwest.social 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

So you aren't actually syaing anything at all. You're just being contrarian for the sake of it.

[–] FiskFisk33@startrek.website 4 points 2 years ago

Not exactly. Arguments like "they should be regulated because they can be used for illegal stuff" are moot, since those usages are already regulated. I'm on the fence on the whole regulation thing and I've yet to see any actual realistic examples on how regulation would look.

Is it even logical to regulate ai images specifically, or should we lump it in together with any form of image manipulation?

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 12 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Oh hi Ethan

[–] GammaGames@beehaw.org 5 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Didn’t expect him to show up and defend his own article lol

The Onion

The Onion