A mother and her 14-year-old daughter are advocating for better protections for victims after AI-generated nude images of the teen and other female classmates were circulated at a high school in New Jersey.

Meanwhile, on the other side of the country, officials are investigating an incident involving a teenage boy who allegedly used artificial intelligence to create and distribute similar images of other students – also teen girls - that attend a high school in suburban Seattle, Washington.

The disturbing cases have put a spotlight yet again on explicit AI-generated material that overwhelmingly harms women and children and is booming online at an unprecedented rate. According to an analysis by independent researcher Genevieve Oh that was shared with The Associated Press, more than 143,000 new deepfake videos were posted online this year, which surpasses every other year combined.

    • DarkGamer@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      Thanks for the valuable contribution to this discussion! It does appear this is a question of identity and personality rights, regarding how one wants to be portrayed.

      Reading that article though, it seems like that only applies to commercial purposes. If one is making deep fakes for their own non-commercial private use, it doesn’t appear personality rights apply.

    • Fal@yiffit.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      11 months ago

      Pretty sure it’s illegal to create sexual images of children, photos or not.

      Maybe in your distopian countries where drawings are illegal. Absolutely absurd you’re promoting that as a good thing.

        • Fal@yiffit.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Yes but this thread is about just drawings in general. Deep faking someone into porn and spreading it around should absolutely be yourself. But it’s not “child porn”. It’s some type of harassment or defamation or something