However logical it may or may not be, it’s a reality. Just yesterday we got a stark reminder of how pervasive poor decisions are.

Also, simply “calling out” your boss and HR for making poor decisions is more likely to put them against you than to fix anything.

Frankly feels like this anti-DEI wave is more politically motivated than a matter of results.

We don’t live in a perfect meritocracy where people are judged solely in grounds of their skills, we live in a society that is already prejudiced where a lot of minorities don’t get the chance to prove themselves. There’s studies proving how young white men are favored over any other demographics even when other people have equal or better resumes.

Man, we should break more stuff.

I feel incredibly bad for small creators that still rely on it for an audience and can’t simply afford to market themselves without it.

No?

The way you are speaking it’s as if they mean to close down the whole thing. There is a whole rest of the world for them to operate in. Sure losing the US market would be a huge detriment, but the owners still might rather have it everywhere else, than keep it running in the US in someone else’s hands.

Windows 11 made my girlfriend’s laptop so slow, even she asked me to install Linux, and she is not even a techy type.

It all went downhill when they decided that companies could just tell you to waive your rights without any scrutiny or negotiation.

We can argue that when Disney ceases to be one of the biggest corporations in the world, and most people can live with part-time jobs, that leave them plenty of time to create art. AI is not going to make it so all art is made for fun rather than money, it’s just going to make it so media corporations get all of the money, without having to pay any to actual artists.

Adapt and overcome how? Using AI? By the nature of the matter, less artists will be needed using AI, some will not make it. So, what then? Dropping their artistic career to go carry boxes for Amazon? What a shitty path we are making for humanity if we need to drop careers of passion to do menial jobs.

Well, we are seeing what happens when they randomize it. It doesn’t always work.

I wouldn’t count on the user realizing the limitations of the technology, or the companies openly admitting to it at expense of their marketing. As far as art AI goes this is just awkward, but it worries me about LLMs, and people using it expecting it to respond with accurate, applicable information, only to come out of it with very skewed worldviews.

This result is clearly wrong, but it’s a little more complicated than saying that adding inclusivity is purposedly training it wrong.

Say, if “entrepreneur” only generated images of white men, and “nurse” only generated images of white women, then that wouldn’t be right either, it would just be reproducing and magnifying human biases. Yet this a sort of thing that AI does a lot, because AI is a pattern recognition tool inherently inclined to collapse data into an average, and data sets seldom have equal or proportional samples for every single thing. Human biases affect how many images we have of each group of people.

It’s not even just limited to image generation AIs. Black people often bring up how facial recognition technology is much spottier to them because the training data and even the camera technology was tuned and tested mainly for white people. Usually that’s not even done deliberately, but it happens because of who gets to work on it and where it gets tested.

Of course, secretly adding “diverse” to every prompt is also a poor solution. The real solution here is providing more contextual data. Unfortunately, clearly, the AI is not able to determine these things by itself.

They can get bullied for not having phones, they can get bullied through phones and social media. They can get bullied for not having stupid ass Fortnite skins. Anything is an excuse for shitty kids who want to bully,

Depressing how quickly this kind of stuff went from outrageous to completely normal.

Can’t let corporate cogs to-be learn that extenuating circumstances excuse lowered productivity 😒

I straight up do not believe that a company can provide a service for over a decade and not be charging enough to be sustainable. The CEO can come and say this to my face and I’ll call them a LIAR. One or a couple years I could buy the idea of investors holding it up for the sake of establishing the business, but why would they be accepting losses for such a long time? This is funky accounting. I’m more inclined to think “it was not sustainable, we need to charge more” is just something they say when they think they can get away with squeezing more money from customers.

Streaming services are paid and they are enshittifying just as fast as anything else, if not faster. No, it’s not that we aren’t paying enough and this is a desperate measure to make up for our neglect. This is corporate greed. Even when they have sustainable business models, that isn’t enough.

Also, I worry how societal inequality might increase if the whole internet becomes subscription based, if people can’t get informed or communicate without paying (more than their internet service, even)

Anime fans could figure it out before them and they can do the same after them.

For the average user, might as well. Most people don’t use PCs in casual settings and most Android phones come with Facebook preinstalled.

Shit that’s made up based on someone else affects the person who’s it based on. This is a basic concept that you are sure to have seen if you have a minimum of real world experience. It’s not even like you could pass deepfake as parody, when the point is making it seem real. Not everyone will be able to know it’s not real, and it will still be humilliating regardless. Pretending it’s so easy to be unaffected by lies and harassment is hollow grandstanding. I can only assume nothing of the sort ever happened to you for you to act so nonchalant about it.

This isn’t even about me, but you can’t get yourself to think of anyone else, can you?

Why would it even matter to “prove deepfake is possible”? It’s not any less humilliating for the person, and it’s not any less of a PR issue for any business. Hoaxes can cause about as much harm as real compromising information, if they are spread far enough.

Every single insult you add I’m more convinced you just don’t care about people beyond your ability to whack off for whoever you feel like.

So you choose that the way to make them pay is to inflict deepfake porn upon them? Sounds like you can see how that can hurt just fine.

Meanwhile, what about someone who got deepfake porn without even get involved in the situation and got fired for it? They could very well say that the AI guy decided getting their rocks off mattered more than their dignity or eating.

Deepfake porn IS an attack. It is itself a form of harassment, if you are doing it with images of people who didn’t consent to it.

Technology is not immune to laws either. We aren’t in the 90s wild west anymore, it has been made more than clear that laws apply to the internet too. Even new laws, if needed.

This is not even something unique to the computers. The advent of cameras led to new laws, and so will AI.

My former boss will have to prove it was me.

Sure sounds like someone doing completely innocent things. Just wholesome tech enthusiast behavior.

You might also just end up getting sued by your former boss on top of getting fired.

You gotta be pretty invested in it to think the solution to deepfake porn is more deepfake porn and that everybody is going to just accept it.

Most people wouldn’t punch you because of a banana but most people would judge you for appearing in porn. However much you might say “fuck them”, the one most likely to get fucked, ironically enough, is you. There are people who get fired over it. It’s bad enough to be treated in such way if you choose to engage in it, it’s even worse if you didn’t even actually do it.

I guess the situation is more like someone dangling a banana between you and the guy who’s likely to punch you.

What you call them might not change how others treat you for it.

There are still people to believe in Bigfoot and UFOs, there’s still people falling for hoaxes every day. To the extent that distrust is spreading, it’s not manifested as widespread reasonable skepticism but the tendency to double down on what people already believe. There are more flat earthers today than there were decades ago.

We are heading to a point that if anyone says deepfake porn is fake, regardless of reasons and arguments, people might just think it’s real just because they feel like it might be. At this point, this isn’t even a new situation. Just like people skip reputable scientific and journalistic sources in favor of random blogs that validate what they already believe, they will treat images, deepfaked or not, much in the same way.

So, at best, some people might believe the victim regardless, but some won’t no matter what is said, and they will treat them as if those images are real.

It’s incredibly common for people not on social media to have friends and family member who are on social media.

Today? I wouldn’t say that so confidently (on Lemmy even). People working in media and marketing do have to use it. Even if they aren’t in it, it doesn’t mean they are immune to such a thing happening, or that people they know won’t stumble on it.

Social media is not known for keeping things contained.

Good for her, but a lot of mothers are less enthusiastic of seeing their children like that

Why would it make revenge porn less of a thing? Why are so many people here convinced that as long people say it’s “fake” it’s not going to negatively affect them?

The mouth breathers will never go away. They might even use the excuse the other way around, that because someone could say just about everything is fake, then it might be real and the victim might be lying. Remember that blurry pictures of bigfoot were enough to fool a lot of people.

Hell, even others believe it is fake, wouldn’t it still be humilliating?

Oh I’m sure that must be a very nice thing to talk out with your mother or significant other.

“Don’t worry they are plastering naked pictures of me everywhere, it’s all fake”

Not every artist is rich and famous either, most are not. It’s disingenuous to pretend they are,

Saying artists want to “collect money without working” when people are trying to get AI trained on their works without permission to replicate their output is a total reversion of the situation. The artist already put on their work, the ones wanting things without work are the AI users.

But I see discussing this won’t go anywhere. If you won’t even admit what an overblown hyperbole it is calling it “neo-feudalism” then there’s no discussion to be had.

Those are not the only two options, and the existence of laws and regulations does not make it “neo-feudalism”.

AI use for defamatory purposes, such as deepfake porn mentioned in another post here, applies whether one is a a massive celebrity or a regular person. As the technology becomes more common, don’t you think there will be people using it on their school and work colleagues and neighbors, for a variety of petty reasons?

You talk about how horrible it would be for people to sell their likeness, without considering that without such laws and protections they can just have their likeness taken with no consent or compensation.

I am seeing a lot of grandstanding of how these laws are just the powerful taking rights away from the common man, but it seems to be exclusively from the angle of how that affects the AI user, not the regular people whose likenesses might get used by AI.

To be fair here’s good reason to be careful over how this matter is legislated, as media companies love to use any excuse for overreach. But the solution is not leaving the internet a wild west of people smearing each other by faking videos.

Consider that the advent of the camera created a need for many laws, because before then even the most realistic image was known to be fabricated rather than a replica of reality. Now AI and other new media technologies are creating possibilities which we never had before, for which our previous laws are insufficient.

So long as people are rewarded for being greedy. Greedy and awful people will always exist, but the issue is in allowing them to control how things are run.

Epic may suck, but sideloading should be a customer right.

The problem are the investors and executives that are there solely to suck money, that don’t care about quality or sustainability and will instantly jump ship as soon as they finish destroying the company, to latch on the next thing.

To them it’s not good enough for a business to be stable, it’s not good enough for it to be profitable. No, it has to be always more profitable than before, infinitely. If they reached the limit, then they will take it apart to get more money.

This is why digital media corporations make up convoluted agreements but they don’t ever change the little button saying “Buy”. If more people realized they are not actually purchasing and getting to own it, they wouldn’t spend their money.

But it’s even more revolting that the law and governments validate this obvious false advertising.