In 2023, more deepfake abuse videos were shared than in every other year in history combined, according to an analysis by independent researcher Genevieve Oh. What used to take skillful, tech-savvy experts hours to Photoshop can now be whipped up at a moment’s notice with the help of an app. Some deepfake websites even offer tutorials on how to create AI pornography.
What happens if we don’t get this under control? It will further blur the lines between what’s real and what’s not — as politics become more and more polarized. What will happen when voters can’t separate truth from lies? And what are the stakes? As we get closer to the presidential election, democracy itself could be at risk. And, as Ocasio-Cortez points out in our conversation, it’s about much more than imaginary images.
“It’s so important to me that people understand that this is not just a form of interpersonal violence, it’s not just about the harm that’s done to the victim,” she says about nonconsensual deepfake porn. She puts down her spoon and leans forward. “Because this technology threatens to do it at scale — this is about class subjugation. It’s a subjugation of entire people. And then when you do intersect that with abortion, when you do intersect that with debates over bodily autonomy, when you are able to actively subjugate all women in society on a scale of millions, at once digitally, it’s a direct connection [with] taking their rights away.”
No I don’t mean cp. I mean revenge porn, like I’ve mentioned multiple times. Are you reading what you are disagreeing with?
“So your example was not a solid one as you claim.” If you’re going to act haughty you ought to at least be right.
When was revenge porn legal in the first place? Do you mean pretty much immediately before it was identified, named and codified? So like two years?
You think that Polaroids that were supposed to stay private were not shared? Thanks for finally reading the posts btw. Also what does pretending that revenge porn only existed for two years get you in this case? Taking it as true, it shows that a rapid response to recently emergent social issue can occur and that laws can be enacted to outlaw the offensive but previously legal porn. It makes my point even more applicable.
And you think this rapid response is going to happen?
https://www.axios.com/2023/12/19/118-congress-bills-least-unproductive-chart
You can call that defeatist, I call it realistic. The Republicans aren’t even passing laws giving them everything that they want that Democrats hand to them on a silver platter.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/republicans-kill-border-bill-sign-trumps-strength-mcconnells-waning-in-rcna137477
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/republicans--are-killing-a-tax-cut-203349220.html
And you think some sort of AI fake media law would even get out of committee? And it would somehow stop websites generating such fake content in Russia from disseminating it in the U.S.?
Outlawing cp doesn’t stop it from being produced or hosted in other countries so we should give up on that too? Or should we sensibly keep a law against it on the books, build an international broad consensus to work against it, and apply political pressure to the countries that won’t cooperate?
“There is plenty to be done at this point. Not being able to fix it 100% doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try to fix it at all.”
“It might not be immediate, perfect, or without resistance but it can be done”
Republicans are shitheads for sure but if nonconsensual ai porn presented to them with the right degree of moral panic they could accidentally do the right thing.
They aren’t achieving anything. So why you think they might accidentally achieve something I don’t know.
And maybe deepfake porn would be something they care about (although I doubt it), but they sure don’t care about deepfake political images.
https://www.theverge.com/2023/4/25/23697328/biden-reelection-rnc-ai-generated-attack-ad-deepfake
So you feel this way about all progressive policies? Like gun control? In the face of opposition don’t try.
In the current climate? Yes. It would be purely performative and a waste of taxpayer money.
So given the purely obstructionist nature of Republicans what is left for Dems to do?