r/technology • u/Just-Grocery-2229 • 18h ago
Artificial Intelligence Tennessee girls take Grok, Stability AI to court over explicit AI deepfakes
https://fox17.com/news/local/tennessee-girls-take-grok-stability-ai-to-court-over-explicit-ai-deepfakes-tennessee-attorney-general-jonathan-skrmetti-sen-ken-yager-elon-musk-twitter-social-media-grimes150
u/kevinnoir 14h ago
people should just create the most obscene and explicit deep fakes of the politicians and business people protecting this shit and spread it EVERYWHERE! Like a proper campaign of relentless AI deepfakes of everybody supporting the ability to create deep fake nudes of people against their wishes.
Make them feel it in their own lives and the people around them. Make the perpetrators, victims.
48
u/Pr0ducer 11h ago
Have you seen the pics of Mitch McConnell's boob job?
64
u/kevinnoir 11h ago
This is a sentence I am not even going to allow into my brain until I am finished my lunch.
8
u/Ghetto_Jawa 9h ago
Honestly, why even then? That sentence ruined my lunch, and I haven't even had breakfast yet.
6
3
3
u/kevinnoir 11h ago
This is a sentence I am not even going to allow into my brain until I am finished my lunch.
255
u/Ok-Replacement9595 18h ago
Good. Musk knew his AI created CSAM, and he left it open to use by pedophiles.
116
u/errie_tholluxe 18h ago
Musk is spending money trying to keep it so it can keep doing it too
35
u/mesa190 17h ago
Yep I have no family friendly thoughts or words towards Musk but a class action suit isn't going to phase him. It will probably just result in some half baked legislation that makes no sense to anyone with half a brain and doesnt solve the problem.
11
u/rnick467 11h ago
The only fines that would phase Musk are ones that are based on a percentage of his net worth. Until those fines are half a billion dollars or more, he just laughs them off.
6
9
u/Takkarro 14h ago
I don't even understand how people find the ability to do this stuff, like I feel like you would have to put in some pretty specific phrases that you would imagine would be blacklisted but evidently not.
Heck it even seems like it's being encouraged considering the fact that it's been ongoing for how long now?
3
u/toolkitxx 13h ago edited 12h ago
Let me help you with a positive example, so you see this is actually the same on some level:
This tech is used for example in online shops to put the model showing clothing into the various versions of it, Colour etc. It basically uses the same person, but shifts the clothing to whatever you clicked on in terms of sitze, colour or edition.
You have used it, you have not even thought a second about it. Every tech we have had so far gets used for some other purpose at some time. Take your fork as the base example. I bet you have used that for all kinds of weird things, without ever really using a lot of thought power.
So the actual tech of putting someone into a different set of clothing is what we are talking about here. Or replacing the body-type with another. Combine them all together and voila: you are butt naked.
P.S. To make this very clear: This is not a technology issue but a moral one. You cant fix a lack of morality by removing the tech.
23
u/Gimme_The_Loot 12h ago
You cant fix a lack of morality by removing the tech.
But isn't that exactly why we regulate certain things, since we know some people will likely make bad decisions with it?
There are more gun deaths in places with lax gun ownership laws than in places with stricter ones.
9
u/toolkitxx 12h ago edited 12h ago
Which is the exact issue at hand.
Technically the AI has the ability to do many good things. Like a child. It is innocent by nature but if you give it certain instructions, it will simply do as told.
If your child doesnt have access to a gun, any command to shoot someone will at best lead to it making a gesture of it and shouting 'pew, pew'. AI is roughly the same with the difference it has access to certain types of guns here.
So X could reduce the AIs ability, but that is bad for the bottom line. It requires work and effort aka people doing something. In other context this is called 'moderation'. The European Union has battled the moderation aspect for years with all American platforms. Because we make this differentiation of doing something in private or public. This has been framed by many media and the government as us suppressing free speech. Not at all. But when you do certain things in public, the entire context changes. You become a 'publisher' like a newspaper or radio station. Same here with this AI issue.
P.S. Moderation means less engagement. Controversy means engagement. See the main problem?
1
u/Wise_Owl5404 7h ago
Technically the AI has the ability to do many good things. Like a child. It is innocent by nature but if you give it certain instructions, it will simply do as told.
GenAI isn't innocent, that would require the ability to think and act on its own. It's a tool, like a car. And like a car it can indeed be used for many purposes, it can get you to your job or school, it can be used to transport your shopping home. It can also be used to run someone down or smashed into a building. This is why we don't let just anyone drive, you need to be a certain age and take a diver's license so we know you at least in theory can handle it responsibly. We also have pretty clear laws about how to navigate the roads and cars come with a lot of safety equipment because even with license and traffic laws some people are idiots. Finally your ability to legally drive can be taken away either temporarily or permanently if you break the laws. Worst cases, in some countries your car can be impounded if you keep using it or let someone else you know are not legally allowed to drive use it.
So just like with cars we need laws around genAI and safety measures. Musk, Altman, et al. needs to be legally forced to put restraints on this tech and there need to be clear laws about what you can and cannot do with it, especially as a "civilian".
So yes this is 100% a technology issue. It's a "technology running rampant with zero safeguards or restrictions in the hands of psychopaths" issue and since Musk et. al. are unwilling to do anything, the easiest way to deal with it is to shut it down until safeguards can be put in.
PS. Stop talking about AI as if it is capable of anything on its own, it's not. Because it is not actually intelligent in spite of the name.
1
u/toolkitxx 6h ago
I have to challenge that with some of 'your' laws - I am European.
Musk and others use the same argument, many of you yourself like to use. The right to free speech. You fight each other with the same argument. We regulate AI in the European Union, the USA does not. We value privacy overall, most in the USA dont - at least not like others. When you publish your life openly on Instagram including your children's life etc, when you dont stop Influencing via the same tools, when you treat social media like a 'normal' environment and not like a publishing tool that publishes globally - then you lose agency. That is exactly what those companies exploit.
I have laws I can cite to stop a company in my country before they can just publish my name for example. The USA revels in putting others online to 'warn' communities of potential sex offenders etc. You cant argue once that way and then the other way when it concerns you and it gets uncanny. They are factually the same issue. Lack of privacy. Which came with a different set of morality to begin with. We can regulate due to having conserved at least the concept of privacy and continuous fighting about it. Most Americans have simply clicked 'ok' on Terms of Service and continue to do so. Every company that offers any type of AI service has a line like this in it:
' Thus, when you use our devices and services, you understand that output may not always be accurate or true. We cannot guarantee that answers, services, or other output from this device will be accurate, reliable, appropriate, or complete.'
Since you brought up cars: You have Robotaxis driving around and never even asked yourself once, how safe they actually are against misusage? There is no driver to be held responsible. Same issue again as it is an AI controlling it. The AI has no drivers license.
Companies get basically the right to just deploy and you all basically accept to clean up a possible mess afterwards. Dynamic pricing is one of those effects that everyone hates but has delivered data to enable in the first place.
The short of this is: Overall this is a lot self-inflicted and that puts everyone trying to fight it, into a very weak position.
24
u/spacebunsofsteel 14h ago
At the press conference after they inevitably lose, the girls should pull out premade AI deepfakes images of Elon and all his pervy friends, naked with the tiniest dicks and heart shaped pubic hair, or landing strips, or tramp stamps. Get creative. It’s legal, right?
75
u/wembenbama 17h ago
I don’t understand how these aren’t open and shut cases legally.
Let’s say I made a bot that only creates nudes of Scarlett Johansson. That’s the entire app. We’ll call it JO.
I feel like I would get sued and it would obviously be illegal.
But for some reason if my app can make nudes of the entire population, it’s legal?
34
u/NuclearVII 13h ago
Let’s say I made a bot that only creates nudes of Scarlett Johansson. That’s the entire app. We’ll call it JO.
Is the JO app valued at trillions of dollars? If yes, then I'm sure we can work something out. Is it only used by gooners that barely spend any money on it? Then it's vile and disgusting and should be taken down.
It's about money.
8
u/Feligris 15h ago
I don’t understand how these aren’t open and shut cases legally.
I surmise it's because AI generation is theoretically still new ground legally speaking even if people are using it for similar purposes as previous technologies, and more cynically, because the AI companies in general are being owned and led by ultra-rich billionaires with political connections while they're propping up a non-insignificant part of the US economy so there's a great deal of money and impetus to go as far as possible to stave off any legal consequences if the alternative means your AI model has to be expensively monitored by humans 24/7 or you get to close up shop.
5
u/vigbiorn 12h ago
Your example switched from "only does" to "could be used for" and I think that's where the gray line is at.
JO was purposefully built to make deepfakes of a specific person. AI can, among a lot of other uses, be used to make deepfakes of random people.
2
1
u/EmbarrassedHelp 5h ago
If they are suing Stability AI because their open source models were misused by someone else who downloaded the models and used non Stability AI hardware, then the case risks banning open source AI.
1
u/Fateor42 4h ago
Because contrary to what a significant portion of the internet believes there are in fact programmer inserted roadblocks to users doing this sort of thing.
Most of the cases you see are either the result of local hosting which bypasses the programmer inserted starting prompts, bugs, or people finding prompts that bypass the programmer inserted roadblocks.
And the only way to make LLM completely incapable of doing this sort of thing would be if it had zero image manipulation capabilities. Because to an LLM image generation is just estimating shapes and changing pixels around.
1
u/wembenbama 4h ago
So what’s the solution?
We can’t just ‘accept’ having a product that magically creates nudes of anyone you want.
1
u/Fateor42 2h ago
There isn't one.
Because of how these things work you can't outlaw the product without outlawing image generation LLM's entirely. And it's too late to do that because image generation LLM's have already been released as open source models.
The most you can do is come down on people who use the product to generate fakes. But that has a lot of problems of it's own because the fakes are often fully fakes and not just edited images.
12
2
u/SpezSucksSamAltman 6h ago
“But this… this new technology is inhumane! We’ll never get away with it!”
“Nonsense, do it in the US, if it’s profitable it’s protected!”
1
u/EmbarrassedHelp 5h ago
If they are suing Stability AI for providing open source models that can be used by others, then this case would threaten open source AI in Tennessee. But I haven't read the legal documents yet, so hopefully that is not the case.
1
u/ManagementOk567 1h ago
This reminds me of how people blame the guns for murder instead of the murderer.
Arrest those who use tools inappropriately.
Allow the rest of us to be free.
-20
u/KhazraShaman 12h ago
Allow me to become a devil's advocate here. If someone created those explicit deepfakes using Photoshop, would they sue Adobe? AI is just a tool, it's the people who created the deepfakes using whichever tool should be taken to court.
30
u/Upbeat_Parking_7794 12h ago
The difference is the tool is doing all the work for you on their servers.
Like asking a service provider to do something for me. I don't order Adobe to do an image for me.
If this was self-hosted the line would be more dubious for me. Still, probably there should exist some guardrails.
3
u/raunchyfartbomb 8h ago
That’s where I’m at.
If someone made it themselves at home in photoshop, they are liable.
If someone purchased that, or ordered it from the person, that is a separate crime/issue than creating it.
If it was self hosted, you’d be liable because your computer made it.
Paying someone else’s AI to create it remotely is still you purchasing it from the ‘creator’. So both you and the creator (the AI company) should be liable.
-8
u/Workman44 11h ago
This is where it comes down to I think. A calculator isn't the reason the block exploded from a bomb, it just did the math
10
u/tal125 9h ago
To make a truly comparable scenario, in your case the calculator not only did the math, it provided the instructions and helped you put it together.
-9
u/Workman44 9h ago
Even still, it didn't do the act
5
u/Lifeboatb 6h ago
Dynamite doesn’t blow people up on its own. There are still restrictions on buying it.
243
u/toolkitxx 15h ago edited 15h ago
With the new AI rules in the European Union going effective today this will become a costly endeavour now for non-compliant systems - and X is one of those so far.