Julia, 21, has received fake nude photos of herself generated by artificial intelligence. The phenomenon is exploding.

“I’d already heard about deepfakes and deepnudes (…) but I wasn’t really aware of it until it happened to me. It was a slightly anecdotal event that happened in other people’s lives, but it wouldn’t happen in mine”, thought Julia, a 21-year-old Belgian marketing student and semi-professional model.

At the end of September 2023, she received an email from an anonymous author. Subject: "Realistic? “We wonder which photo would best resemble you”, she reads.

Attached were five photos of her.

In the original content, posted on her social networks, Julia poses dressed. In front of her eyes are the same photos. Only this time, Julia is completely naked.

Julia has never posed naked. She never took these photos. The Belgian model realises that she has been the victim of a deepfake.

  • nexusband@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    38
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    7 months ago

    This is going to be a serious issue in the future - either society changes and these things are going to be accepted or these kind of generating ai models have to be banned. But that’s still not going to be a “security” against it…

    I also think we have to come up with digital watermarks that are easy to use…

    • fidodo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      I think there’s a big difference between creating them and spreading them, and putting punishments on spreading nudes against someone’s will, real or fake is a better 3rd option. The free speech implications of banning software that’s capable of creating them is too broad and fuzzy, but I think that putting harsh penalties on spreading them on the grounds of harassment would be clear cut and effective. I didn’t see a big difference in between spreading revenge porn and deep fakes and we already have laws against spreading revenge porn.

    • Lemming6969@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      7 months ago

      With ai and digital art… What is real? What is a person? What is a cartoon or a similar but not same likeness? In some cases what even is nudity? How old is an ai image? How can anything then be legal or illegal?

    • TherouxSonfeir@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      24
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      We gotta ban photo editing software too. Shit, we gotta ban computers entirely. Shit, now we have to ban electricity.

      • LethalSmack@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        Where did it say anything about a Ministry of Truth deciding what can be posted online? Making it illegal and having a 3rd party decide if every post is allowed are two very different things

        If it’s illegal then there are ramifications for the platform, the user posting it, and the tool that created it.

        Content moderation is already a thing so it’s nothing new. Just one more thing on the list to check for when a post is reported

        • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          7 months ago

          Making it illegal and having a 3rd party decide if every post is allowed are two very different things

          Depends on the scale. If you’re a black man in the South in 1953, having a 3rd party decide whether you can do something means you can’t do that thing.

          I’m not speaking to this particular topic, just saying in general 3rd parties can be corrupted. It’s not a foolproof solution or even always a good idea.

          • LethalSmack@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            I agree. It’s a terrible idea for many reasons. The fact that we can’t trust something like that to run in good faith is among the top of those reasons.

            The comment I was responding to was saying this proposed law would strip our ability to speak our mind because it would create a new 3rd party group that would validate each post before allowing them online.

            I was pointing out that making specific content illegal is not the same as having every post scrutinized before it goes live.

          • LethalSmack@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            7 months ago

            Well, you’re about 20 years too late. It has already started

            See any of the tor sites for examples of what is currently filtered out of the regular internet. It even gets your google account permanently banned if you log in via the tor browser

      • nexusband@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        7 months ago

        Yeah, sorry - I disagree on every level with your take.

        I am also convinced that at least the LLMs will soon destroy themselves, due to the simple fact that “garbage in, garbage out”.

    • fustigation769curtain@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      15
      ·
      7 months ago

      It’s not a serious issue at all.

      Of course, if you’re the kind of greedy/lazy person who wants to make money off of pictures of their body, you’re going to have to find a real job.