all 69 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 237 points 1 year ago

do you mean to tell me that "mecha hitler" doesn't respect consent?

  • source
  • [–] 169 points 1 year ago (21 children)

    AI will be controlled very tightly......when it starts fucking with ultra rich people.

  • source
  • hideshow 21 child comments
  • [–] 62 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 73 points 1 year ago (14 children)
  • [+] 69 points 1 year ago (10 children)
  • Where are the topless Rupert Murdoch videos?

    I DEMAND TO SEE THE TOPLESS RUPERT MURDOCH VIDEOS!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [+] -25 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    Yea, cus race, gender and age decides the character of a man!

    Diddy must have been innocent!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    No, but it does play a pretty significant role in how much influence they have to control AI

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [+] -18 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    …yes, ai is controlled by white old rich man! Thats what makes them evil, their control over ai…

    Jesus fuclimg christ raw mate

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • 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.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -20 points 1 year ago* (3 children)

    Yes, because race and gender decides the character of a man

    Diddy must have been innocent!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 21 points 1 year ago

    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

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child)

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    -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

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 66 points 1 year ago (3 children)
  • [–] 47 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    i dont care for Swift but please lawsuit musk😭

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 32 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 130 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    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.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 92 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    No, it’s fine if it’s from rich people. It’s that terrible, evil, poverty skin that’s illegal.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 40 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    I was in a band called Poverty Skin. We mostly did folk punk and pornographic protest songs.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 52 points 1 year ago

    This is just so gross.

  • source
  • [–] 52 points 1 year ago

    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.

  • source
  • [–] 33 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    Will Grok explode if someone asks it to create an image of a black transexual couple kissing?

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 53 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    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.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 39 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 25 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    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.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 22 points 1 year ago

    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.

  • source
  • [–] 22 points 1 year ago

    Is this not a violation of Rafael Cruz and Trump's "Take it Down Act?"

  • source
  • [–] 14 points 1 year ago

    b-b-but muh freeze peach!!!!!

  • source
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago

    failed at politics and failing at tech, turned to porn. what a story arc

  • source
  • [+] 17 points 1 year ago (7 children)
  • [+] 19 points 1 year ago (3 children)
  • [–] -4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago* (2 children)

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Can Grok even generate video?

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] -9 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  • [–] 14 points 1 year ago

    "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.

  • source
  • parent
  • 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).

  • source
  • parent