this post was submitted on 19 Sep 2023
374 points (100.0% liked)

Europe

106 readers
1 users here now

News/Interesting Stories/Beautiful Pictures from Europe 🇪🇺

(Current banner: Thunder mountain, Germany, 🇩🇪 ) Feel free to post submissions for banner pictures

Rules

(This list is obviously incomplete, but it will get expanded when necessary)

  1. Be nice to each other (e.g. No direct insults against each other);
  2. No racism, antisemitism, dehumanisation of minorities or glorification of National Socialism allowed;
  3. No posts linking to mis-information funded by foreign states or billionaires.

Also check out !yurop@lemm.ee

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Police investigation remains open. The photo of one of the minors included a fly; that is the logo of Clothoff, the application that is presumably being used to create the images, which promotes its services with the slogan: “Undress anybody with our free service!”

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] aard@kyu.de 162 points 1 year ago (3 children)

This was just a matter of time - and there isn't really that much the affected can do (and in some cases, should do). Shutting down that service is the correct thing - but that'll only buy a short amount of time: Training custom models is trivial nowadays, and both the skill and hardware to do so is in reach of the age group in question.

So in the long term we'll see that shift to images generated at home, by kids often too young to be prosecuted - and you won't be able to stop that unless you start outlawing most of AI image generation tools.

At least in Germany the dealing with child/youth pornography got badly botched by incompetent populists in the government - which would send any of those parents to jail for at least a year, if they take possession of one of those generated pictures. Having it sent to their phone and going to police for a complaint would be sufficient to get prosecution against them started.

There's one blessing coming out of that mess, though: For girls who did take pictures, and had them leaked, saying "they're AI generated" is becoming a plausible way out.

[–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 10 points 1 year ago

Yeah, what I see happening is people end up not caring as much because there's going to be so much plausible AI generated crap that any real stuff will be lost in the noise.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] ciko22i3@sopuli.xyz 79 points 1 year ago (1 children)

At least now you can claim it's AI if your real nudes leak

[–] taladar@feddit.de 56 points 1 year ago (1 children)

In the long term that might even lead to society stopping their freak-outs every time someone in some semi-sensitive position is discovered to have nude pictures online.

[–] SkyeStarfall@lemmy.blahaj.zone 19 points 1 year ago

I hope so. We shouldn't be ashamed of our bodies or sexuality.

[–] rufus@discuss.tchncs.de 50 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

Interesting. Replika AI, ChatGPT etc crack down on me for doing erotic stories and roleplay text dialogues. And this Clothoff App happily draws child pornography of 14 year olds? Shaking my head...

I wonder why they have no address etc on their website and the app isn't available in any of the proper app-stores.

Obviously police should ask Instagram who blackmails all these girls... Teach them a proper lesson. And then stop this company. Have them fined a few millions for generating and spreading synthetic CP. At least write a letter to their hosting or payment providers.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] rayyyy@kbin.social 36 points 1 year ago (2 children)

The shock value of a nude picture will become increasingly humdrum as they become more widespread. Nudes will become so common that no one will batt an eye. In fact, some less endowed, less perfect ladies will no doubt do AI generated pictures or movies of themselves to sell on the internet. Think of it as photoshop X 10.

[–] DessertStorms@kbin.social 41 points 1 year ago (2 children)

This isn't about nude photos, it's about consent.

[–] andrai@feddit.de 43 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I can already get a canvas and brush and draw what I think u/DessertStorms looks like naked and there is nothing you can do about it.

[–] DessertStorms@kbin.social 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You're not making the point you think you are, instead you're just outing yourself as a creep. ¯_(ツ)_/¯

[–] andrai@feddit.de 19 points 1 year ago

Hey, you dropped this \

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] taladar@feddit.de 29 points 1 year ago

Photoshopped nude pictures of celebrities (and people the photoshopper knew personally) have been around for at least 30 years at this point. This is not a new issue as far as the legal situation is concerned, just the ease of doing it changed a bit.

[–] SharkEatingBreakfast@sopuli.xyz 7 points 1 year ago (3 children)

The article is about children.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] AbaixoDeCao@lemm.ee 29 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That's really, really sad, EU, please try to regulate AI.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Sigmatics@lemmy.ca 22 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The only thing new about this is that the photos are probably more realistic, but still fake. Apps to do this existed before GenAI was a thing

[–] MargotRobbie@lemm.ee 21 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Banning diffusion models doesn't work, the tech is already out there and you can't put it back in the box. Fake nudes used to be done with PhotoShop, the current generative AI models only makes them faster to make.

This can only be stopped on the distribution side, and any new laws should focus on that.

But the silver lining of this whole thing is that nude scandals for celebs aren't really possible any more if you can just say it's probably a deepfake.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] tetraodon@feddit.it 20 points 1 year ago (5 children)

I feel somewhat bad saying this, but the wo/man (it will be a man) who can make an Apple Vision Pro work with AI nudifiers will become rich.

[–] TheGreenGolem@lemm.ee 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You know the old joke: if we could do anything with just our eyes, the streets would be full of dead people and pregnant women.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] uxia@midwest.social 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Lol then people will probably start assuming anyone wearing that technology is a pedophile and/or disgusting creep.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] YurkshireLad@lemmy.ca 20 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Maybe something will change as soon as people start creating and distributing fake AI nudes of that country’s leaders.

[–] Risk@feddit.uk 16 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Honestly surprised this didn't happen first.

Be a great way to discredit politicians in homophobic states, by showing a politician taking it up the arse.

[–] Sabata11792@kbin.social 11 points 1 year ago

Its already happened, and there is not enough In the world bleach to unsee it.

[–] duxbellorum@lemm.ee 15 points 1 year ago (37 children)

This seems like a pretty significant overreaction. Like yes, it’s gross and it feels personal, but it’s not like any of the subjects were willing participants…their reputation is not being damaged. Would they lose their shit about a kid gluing a cut out of their crush’s face over the face of a pornstar in a magazine? Is this really any different from that?

[–] 0x815@feddit.de 24 points 1 year ago (3 children)

These are school girls in their teenage years.To them and their parents, this must be a nightmare.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] RagnarokOnline@reddthat.com 17 points 1 year ago (4 children)

I don’t want to band wagon against you, but I do think it’s important that people who agree with your viewpoint have a chance to understand that the situation is a violation of privacy.

The kids’ reputation is, likely, damaged. You have an underage girl who is already dealing with the confusion and hierarchy of high school. Then (A) someone generates semi-accurate photos of what their naked body looks like and (B) distributes it to others.

Issue (A) is bad because it’s essentially CSAM and also because it’s attempting to access a view of someone that the subject likely hasn’t permitted the generator to have access to. This is a privacy violation and the ethics around it are questionable at best.

Issue (B) is that the generator didn’t stop at the violations of issue (A), but has now shared that material with other people who know the subject without the subject’s consent, and likely without her knowledge of the recipients. This means that the subject now has to perpetually wonder if every person they interact with (friends, teachers, other parents, her own parents) have seen lewd pictures of her. Hopefully you can see how this could disturb a young woman.

Now apply a different situation to it. Suppose you took a test at school or at work that shows you as dumb (like, laughably dumb; enough to make you feel subconscious). Even if you don’t think it’s a fair test, this test exists. Now, assume that someone shared this test with your friends, co-workers, and even your parents without you knowing exactly who received it. And instead of everyone saying “it’s just a dumb test — it doesn’t mean anything”, they decide it means something about you. Every hour or so, you walk by someone or interact with someone who chuckles or cracks a joke at your expense. You’re not allowed by your community to move on from this test.

Before your test was released, you could blend in. Now, you’re the person everyone is looking at and judging. Think of that added anxiety on top of everything else you have to deal with.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] LordXenu@lemm.ee 11 points 1 year ago

Bruh, all of this sounds creepy as shit.

load more comments (34 replies)
[–] iByteABit@lemm.ee 12 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Governments need to strike hard against all kinds of platforms like this, even if they can be used for legitimate reasons.

AI is way too dangerous a tool to allow free innovation and market on, it's the number one technology right now that must be heavily regulated.

[–] Blapoo@lemmy.ml 20 points 1 year ago (6 children)

What, exactly would they regulate? The training data? The output? What kinds of user inputs are accepted?

All of this is hackable.

[–] pseudorandom@kbin.social 19 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's child porn in this case. Regulate it as such. Putting a real child's head onto an AI generated body is sexualizing a child.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] RaivoKulli@sopuli.xyz 12 points 1 year ago (35 children)

Making unauthorized nude images of other people, probably. The service did advertise, "undress anyone".

load more comments (35 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Risk@feddit.uk 17 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Good luck regulating cross borders.

I'd also prioritise regulating fossil fuel technology as the number one priority.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] danhab99@programming.dev 9 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I tried the AI with a pic of me. It was incredibly inaccurate and gave me something between a dick and a vagina. Nothing truly damaging.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Aetherion@feddit.de 7 points 1 year ago

Better don't stop posting your life into the internet, this would push people to create more child porn! /s

load more comments
view more: next ›