No, being white, old, and rich doesn't make someone evil, though it's unlikely if not impossible to reach a certain enormity of wealth or power without being or becoming very twisted indeed.
It DOES, however, give you the kind of privilege that makes a controlling interest in the newest Silicon Valley fad that the rest of the world is suffering under much more likely.
Of the richest 100 people in the world, only one is a black man and of the world's over 3000 billionaires only 3 are black women. Also, nearly half of all billionaires are between 50 and 70 years old.
we exist in a classist patriarchal white supremacist society. examples of people who are both evil and Black don't change the overall framework of the problem and how it perpetuates itself
To be fair gender does indeed contribute to the character of a "man" by definition.
Race doesn't inherently but it just so happens that the people who the US justice system gives preferential treatment to are rich old white men. Wonder why that is? Could be that they are the ones who predominantly control the purse strings of the capitalistic society in which we live, and by extension will exert control over AI when it begins to harm them or their bottom line personally but not before hand.
Edit: I put "man" in quotes to point out the joke. Someone who defines themselves as a woman or anything other than a man can't have their gender contribute to the character of a man because they aren't one. It wasn't that deep.
-No your gender doesn’t have any bearing on your character! I too could make unfounded statements too! Your mom smell like argenian crackers
-No, the us does not give preferential to any sex, nor race anyomore; and it has never given preferential treatment to seniority! Again, I could make unfounded statements too!
-Nor does it actually give preferential treatment to rich folk from a legal sense, they do have a strong edge being capable of accessing not only necessary resources, but good ones at that! Once again, I could make unfounded statements too if I was bothered to make any more up
Deepfake of Peter Thiel saying trans rights are human rights and brown people are people/shouldn’t be genocided (see: Palestine). Hell, make it a Brady bunch/we-are-the-world type of video collection.
Throw in some “we should also tax all billionaires” and it might work.
Forty three years ago I was in my first computer science class with a 'personal' computer. Computers and later the internet held so much promise. I wish I still felt the same about them but it seems every technology is used for one of two things: kill people more efficiently or create & distribute porn. So much potential and yet it gets used for crap more often than not.
Exactly! Making nonconsensual porn of people is fucked up in today's culture and the industry will often exploit workers, but porn itself is based actually.
Tell me about it. How I long for the days of MySpace and Napster and the fun little hobbyist websites of the 90s, when windows was just an innocent little OS. Now we have Meta/Google/Amazon and that's pretty much the whole internet and it's watching you ALL THE TIME.
counterpoint: nowadays i can share public transport memes with gay nerds on the other side of the world from a device the size of my hand, precisely whenever the fuck i want to, even if i'm in the middle fo a god damn forest.
so the king of incels added porn option to its ai. i mean it's fucking weird but not surprising. after all this is the most divorced man in the universe.
Most AI generators are terrible at depicting minorities (I have tried to get them to generate minorities myself). So chances are it will just return white cishet people still
do you think republicans and trump will enforce the take it down law that they passed against elon and twitter which calls for the following punishments?
Offenses involving adults.--Any person who violates paragraph (2)(A) or (3)(A) shall be fined under title 18, United States Code, imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both.
Offenses involving minors.--Any person who violates paragraph (2)(B) or (3)(B) shall be fined under title 18, United States Code, imprisoned not more than 3 years, or both.
I don't care if it becomes legal to make this kinda content, you know as a fact she will absolutely use everything at her disposal to make it illegal again, even if that means using her fans to help.
I may not be a big fan of her or her music, but even I'm not suicidal enough to try and attack her.
This is why in future based media like futurama or starship troopers no one cares about nudity, it’s the inevitable result of technology that the only way past it is to accept it.
I don't care about how the characters in fictional shows think about non consensual, fake nude images and I don't think discussing it does any good. Whoopdeedoo, Leela doesn't care about deep fakes of herself. She's also not a real person.
No what you mean s that the majority won't care. The individual being depicted will still care. You won't and you seem to assume your opinion will be everyone else's as well.
Do they care about the significantly worse things that come next?
Edit: I'll add that context is key. Nudity in a public sauna? Absolutely fine. Nudity in the rush hour metro? Not so much. Also this is nudity without the consent of the depicted subject.
I was curious and as far as I can tell its for Grok 4 users. I asked the anonymous Grok version how much it cost to use Grok 4 and it said $300 / month. So let's be clear. Very wealthy and very stupid people are the ones making these videos. No one else.
Well, people may also spend $300, make videos, and then post/host them somewhere where people pay money for them or they get ad revenues or pays for views. In the right place, you could easily make your $300 back plus some. Unethical, certainly, but possible.
"I'm pro AI revenge porn and think it should be legal to create AI revenge porn, to outlaw it is akin to fascism because I should be free to create AI revenge porn. This is democracy, damn it, where AI revenge porn is a pillar of our freedom!"
Maybe you meant to reply to someone else, but as a top level comment, this is what it sounds like you're saying.
Nah, the majority of people can decide to outlaw actions in a democratic state. Under consistent understandings of intellectual property, people should have the ability to prevent their likeness becoming a product unless it actual falls under fair use. Like most things AI, pre existing IP laws make most current uses of AI illegal. The only reason it's still getting pushed is thanks to the rule of law being secondary to the power of money.
The result is that anti deepfake laws aren't authoritarian unless you consider liberal democracy to be fundamentally authoritarian (which is fair, but only if you're consistent about it).
do you mean to tell me that "mecha hitler" doesn't respect consent?
AI will be controlled very tightly......when it starts fucking with ultra rich people.
Ultra rich men*
And let's be honest, they love this feature
Where are the topless Rupert Murdoch videos?
I DEMAND TO SEE THE TOPLESS RUPERT MURDOCH VIDEOS!
Surely some AI has made a lemon party with Murdoch, thiel, Trump?
I need to bleach my mind's eye
You are going straight to hell for that. Straight to hell....
Yea, cus race, gender and age decides the character of a man!
Diddy must have been innocent!
No, but it does play a pretty significant role in how much influence they have to control AI
…yes, ai is controlled by white old rich man! Thats what makes them evil, their control over ai…
Jesus fuclimg christ raw mate
No, being white, old, and rich doesn't make someone evil, though it's unlikely if not impossible to reach a certain enormity of wealth or power without being or becoming very twisted indeed.
It DOES, however, give you the kind of privilege that makes a controlling interest in the newest Silicon Valley fad that the rest of the world is suffering under much more likely.
Of the richest 100 people in the world, only one is a black man and of the world's over 3000 billionaires only 3 are black women. Also, nearly half of all billionaires are between 50 and 70 years old.
Are you actually this clueless or are you doing a bit? Genuine question.
Yes, because race and gender decides the character of a man
Diddy must have been innocent!
we exist in a classist patriarchal white supremacist society. examples of people who are both evil and Black don't change the overall framework of the problem and how it perpetuates itself
To be fair gender does indeed contribute to the character of a "man" by definition.
Race doesn't inherently but it just so happens that the people who the US justice system gives preferential treatment to are rich old white men. Wonder why that is? Could be that they are the ones who predominantly control the purse strings of the capitalistic society in which we live, and by extension will exert control over AI when it begins to harm them or their bottom line personally but not before hand.
Edit: I put "man" in quotes to point out the joke. Someone who defines themselves as a woman or anything other than a man can't have their gender contribute to the character of a man because they aren't one. It wasn't that deep.
-No your gender doesn’t have any bearing on your character! I too could make unfounded statements too! Your mom smell like argenian crackers -No, the us does not give preferential to any sex, nor race anyomore; and it has never given preferential treatment to seniority! Again, I could make unfounded statements too! -Nor does it actually give preferential treatment to rich folk from a legal sense, they do have a strong edge being capable of accessing not only necessary resources, but good ones at that! Once again, I could make unfounded statements too if I was bothered to make any more up
Deepfake of Peter Thiel saying trans rights are human rights and brown people are people/shouldn’t be genocided (see: Palestine). Hell, make it a Brady bunch/we-are-the-world type of video collection.
Throw in some “we should also tax all billionaires” and it might work.
Someone should make a compliation of a bunch of deepfakes of ultra rich motherfuckers saying stuff like this, yeah, it would go far I think
videos showing them getting French Revolution may start a conversation.
I know what I have to do, but I don't know if I have the strength to do it... I say in front of the big red button labeled 'Jeff Bezos porn generator'
Already generating some Jeff Bezos x Musk kissing while both being guillotined.
No it won't.
Isn't nudity treated like a crime in the US? I thought MasterCard, Visa, PayPal etc. ban everything that's even remotely related to naked skin.
No, it’s fine if it’s from rich people. It’s that terrible, evil, poverty skin that’s illegal.
I was in a band called Poverty Skin. We mostly did folk punk and pornographic protest songs.
I have to know what on earth a photographic protest song would sound like. Is it just Fortunate Son with moaning?
Well, you just play regular instruments but... not using your hands.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s6Ws-ON67NE
Gabe Newell is rich as fuck...
Lawsuit time
i dont care for Swift but please lawsuit musk😭
I mean in order to sue musk you'd need a pretty strong legal team and a massive fan base for support. Probably a security company to protect you.
I haven't heard of this swift fellow but I hope they have all that. /S
Jokes aside I can't wait to hear that song.
I can wait forever for that song, but not for the lawsuit and condemn.
This is just so gross.
Forty three years ago I was in my first computer science class with a 'personal' computer. Computers and later the internet held so much promise. I wish I still felt the same about them but it seems every technology is used for one of two things: kill people more efficiently or create & distribute porn. So much potential and yet it gets used for crap more often than not.
I don't have an issue with porn. It's a perfectly useful part of technology. It doesn't hurt anyone.
What's in the OP isn't though.
Exactly! Making nonconsensual porn of people is fucked up in today's culture and the industry will often exploit workers, but porn itself is based actually.
Making nonconsensual porn of people is fucked up no matter the culture or time, I'd say
I do agree that consensual porn is more than welcome though. Allowing people to express their sexuality is healthy
And ads, don't forget about the ads.
Capitalism, baby!
Tell me about it. How I long for the days of MySpace and Napster and the fun little hobbyist websites of the 90s, when windows was just an innocent little OS. Now we have Meta/Google/Amazon and that's pretty much the whole internet and it's watching you ALL THE TIME.
counterpoint: nowadays i can share public transport memes with gay nerds on the other side of the world from a device the size of my hand, precisely whenever the fuck i want to, even if i'm in the middle fo a god damn forest.
so the king of incels added porn option to its ai. i mean it's fucking weird but not surprising. after all this is the most divorced man in the universe.
Will Grok explode if someone asks it to create an image of a black transexual couple kissing?
Pffft. Nude trans Elon; the asshole would lose his mind
getting frisky with trump
Most AI generators are terrible at depicting minorities (I have tried to get them to generate minorities myself). So chances are it will just return white cishet people still
Well some are so good they even drew black people when asked for someone in a Nazi uniform.
do you think republicans and trump will enforce the take it down law that they passed against elon and twitter which calls for the following punishments?
Offenses involving adults.--Any person who violates paragraph (2)(A) or (3)(A) shall be fined under title 18, United States Code, imprisoned not more than 2 years, or both.
Offenses involving minors.--Any person who violates paragraph (2)(B) or (3)(B) shall be fined under title 18, United States Code, imprisoned not more than 3 years, or both.
That was the first thing I thought when I read the article.
Very eager to see a class action or something pop up and see how the GOP scrambles for a loophole.
I don't care if it becomes legal to make this kinda content, you know as a fact she will absolutely use everything at her disposal to make it illegal again, even if that means using her fans to help.
I may not be a big fan of her or her music, but even I'm not suicidal enough to try and attack her.
Is this not a violation of Rafael Cruz and Trump's "Take it Down Act?"
This is why in future based media like futurama or starship troopers no one cares about nudity, it’s the inevitable result of technology that the only way past it is to accept it.
It is consent about nudity.
What they mean is when nudity becomes so common you don't need consent for it anymore, then nobody would care about fake nudes.
I don't care about how the characters in fictional shows think about non consensual, fake nude images and I don't think discussing it does any good. Whoopdeedoo, Leela doesn't care about deep fakes of herself. She's also not a real person.
No what you mean s that the majority won't care. The individual being depicted will still care. You won't and you seem to assume your opinion will be everyone else's as well.
Do they care about the significantly worse things that come next?
Edit: I'll add that context is key. Nudity in a public sauna? Absolutely fine. Nudity in the rush hour metro? Not so much. Also this is nudity without the consent of the depicted subject.
Nudity in the busy metro: as long as there aren't juices going anywhere I actually don't give a shit.
my rule of thumb is cover floppy bits, because they flop about
b-b-but muh freeze peach!!!!!
failed at politics and failing at tech, turned to porn. what a story arc
Can Grok even generate video?
I was curious and as far as I can tell its for Grok 4 users. I asked the anonymous Grok version how much it cost to use Grok 4 and it said $300 / month. So let's be clear. Very wealthy and very stupid people are the ones making these videos. No one else.
Well, people may also spend $300, make videos, and then post/host them somewhere where people pay money for them or they get ad revenues or pays for views. In the right place, you could easily make your $300 back plus some. Unethical, certainly, but possible.
It's even easier if you use stolen credit cards for the initial $300 and pocket the ("clean and honest") social media income.
"I'm pro AI revenge porn and think it should be legal to create AI revenge porn, to outlaw it is akin to fascism because I should be free to create AI revenge porn. This is democracy, damn it, where AI revenge porn is a pillar of our freedom!"
Maybe you meant to reply to someone else, but as a top level comment, this is what it sounds like you're saying.
Nah, the majority of people can decide to outlaw actions in a democratic state. Under consistent understandings of intellectual property, people should have the ability to prevent their likeness becoming a product unless it actual falls under fair use. Like most things AI, pre existing IP laws make most current uses of AI illegal. The only reason it's still getting pushed is thanks to the rule of law being secondary to the power of money.
The result is that anti deepfake laws aren't authoritarian unless you consider liberal democracy to be fundamentally authoritarian (which is fair, but only if you're consistent about it).