This is inarguably horrible but the use of AI seems irrelevant.
You could make this same thing with any animation tool. It’s the idea that’s disgusting.
Do you think AI is mentioned because it makes the article seem more up to the minute and in keeping with current tech trends?
“A man drew a disgusting picture of a horrible event using pencils and paper this week.”
If pencils and paper were actively causing a spike of worker precarity, a sudden increase in fraud and identity theft and misuse of people’s personas against their will and without their consent, I wouldn’t blame people for being upset at those fancy new pencils or paper instead of smugly telling them how actually the technology in a vacuum with no one using it is actually harmless.
These people are using likeliness of actual people without their (or their heirs’/parents’ in case of dead people) permission to make money off of tragedies. I don’t know about you, but I think we as a society should have laws from preventing this from happening.
So you would support government limiting an individual’s right to run software on their computer because you don’t agree with what the software outputs?
That’s absolute nonsense. The entire premise of these machine learning models is that they accept any arbitrary input, you would want to neuter that?
So it’s acceptable for AIs to generate these sorts of outputs, as long as they aren’t shared online? Sure, the outputs aren’t very tasteful, but they’re certainly not illegal by any stretch.
Why do you think the government should intervene, and what you would even expect them to do? No laws are being broken.
If you somehow forbid AIs from generating this through a national law just because it’s offensive, it’ll open to floodgates to ban 1,000 other things that are offensive. Where do you draw the line? Ban this content from websites like TikTok, sure. But it doesn’t make sense to regulate this from the AIs themselves.
This is inarguably horrible but the use of AI seems irrelevant. You could make this same thing with any animation tool. It’s the idea that’s disgusting.
Do you think AI is mentioned because it makes the article seem more up to the minute and in keeping with current tech trends?
“A man drew a disgusting picture of a horrible event using pencils and paper this week.”
“Pencils and paper are so awful.”
If pencils and paper were actively causing a spike of worker precarity, a sudden increase in fraud and identity theft and misuse of people’s personas against their will and without their consent, I wouldn’t blame people for being upset at those fancy new pencils or paper instead of smugly telling them how actually
the technology in a vacuum with no one using it is actually harmless.
The ratio of effort to output is off the chart. Don’t pretend you don’t get it.
Why does that matter in this context?
You really don’t see any difference between using an AI to generate powershell script and using AI to milk murder of children?
I don’t see the difference between doing this with AI or doing it with Photoshop. It’s horrible independently of the tools used.
Thanks. That was precisely my point. The tools used to make this are irrelevant. It’s fucked up regardless.
Cool, so you see no problem with these ghouls being even more efficient with AI because governments have zero fucking clue about new technology?
Are you too stupid to understand why that is a horrible thing?
I think there should be legal avenues to shut down people who do that shit.
It doesn’t matter what tools they’re using. The solution is the same regardless.
Wait, what does Government tech-illiteracy have to do with this?
These people are using likeliness of actual people without their (or their heirs’/parents’ in case of dead people) permission to make money off of tragedies. I don’t know about you, but I think we as a society should have laws from preventing this from happening.
So you would support government limiting an individual’s right to run software on their computer because you don’t agree with what the software outputs?
That’s absolute nonsense. The entire premise of these machine learning models is that they accept any arbitrary input, you would want to neuter that?
They’re not just running the software on their computer. They’re publishing it on the internet for mass consumption you amazingly dense potato.
So it’s acceptable for AIs to generate these sorts of outputs, as long as they aren’t shared online? Sure, the outputs aren’t very tasteful, but they’re certainly not illegal by any stretch.
Why do you think the government should intervene, and what you would even expect them to do? No laws are being broken.
If you somehow forbid AIs from generating this through a national law just because it’s offensive, it’ll open to floodgates to ban 1,000 other things that are offensive. Where do you draw the line? Ban this content from websites like TikTok, sure. But it doesn’t make sense to regulate this from the AIs themselves.