You can choose settings that make your likeness private, or open to just your friends — but I figured, why not?
Because this is the internet?
She basically said “take my face, do whatever with it” and now seems surprised that people did whatever with it to get their rocks off.
The article seems to want to portray this as unexpected, as if she didn’t expect exactly this outcome, as if this was some new, unusual thing, while at the same time insisting she knows how the internet works, Rule 34 and whatnot. “I went to People Don’t Ask For Consent Island where I know people don’t ask for consent because I’ve been a PDAFC Island journalist for years, the tour guide asked me if I was sure and if I maybe wanted to wear full body metal armour and bring weapons and stay inside the car, but I said, eh, it’ll be fine, why wouldn’t it?”
I’m not saying it’s okay for people to generate videos like that. Could at least keep it private instead of broadcasting your fantasies involving real people to the world. If someone is raped while wearing a revealing outfit, I don’t blame them, I blame the rapist. Obviously. I’d still talk to my (imaginary) children about why they should be careful and think about what they wear when they go out. Because unfortunately there are people out there who see revealing clothes as an invitation to do sex to the person inside the clothes, just like there are people who see this service as an invitation to create real-person porn.
Was this supposed to be an experiment? “I gave permission to use my face to demonstrate how easy it is for people with unusual fetishes to use it for things I may be uncomfortable with”? Why not frame it that way then instead of this weirdness?
Because I agree, this has always been a problem but that doesn’t mean we need to make it easier by making the tools freely (or cheaply) available to generate realistic porn with a few clicks. And people who may not be tech savvy need to be made aware that this WILL happen to them if they’re not careful (just like my imaginary children need to be made aware of how people might interpret their clothes).
If she’s surprised by this, I hate to warn her of what’s coming. 4chan has had threads for years of people doing x-ray or photoshop content. AI will expedite and raise the quality. I’ve seen people taking banal photos and making full porn versions of those images.
With OpenAI & likely others taking this “assume you have approval until you get outright refusal,” it’s a recipe for disaster. Any public figure can expect porn of them to exist.
At some level, people need to realize that posting things online has risk. Additionally, humans are attracted to a wide variety of things. I know some women who censor their feet in pictures or crop them out intentionally. I don’t think self censorship will help, but this author being icked when she gave a carte blanch makes me chuckle. You’re online; is this your first day here?
She didn’t seem too surprised and mentioned that women especially know that this will happen. The young kids posing with porn however, seemed a little problematic, as well as there fact that Sora explicitly (ha) blocks the creation of nudity OR sexually explicit content, but seems to have a far too narrow a definition of that.
The comparison to rape is probably not apt here. 60% of rapes are committed by someone known to the victim. It’d be more helpful to tech your imaginary kids that they can come to you no matter what, that their bodily autonomy is important, and where it’s ok for others to touch them. If you’re going to tech them elements of safety for the remaining percent, maybe focus on location, situational awareness, safety in numbers etc. Often it’s just as easy to assault someone in frumpy clothes as in more revealing clothes, and that goes for both known and unknown perpetrators.
Regarding the premise of your comment, though I don’t think it’s surprising, technically it’s the only way to know for sure what would happen. I’m not suggesting the results are groundbreaking, but there’s now at least something we can point to if we wanted evidence based reasoning to support what we all believed would happen.
Well yes, I didn’t think I had to list all the different things I’d teach my kids but that wasn’t my point anyway. I was mainly saying that I don’t blame people whose image is abused like this, even if they “should have known better than to show your face on the internet” - just like I wouldn’t blame a rape victim, even if they “should have known better than to wear that skimpy dress”.
You can’t say ‘I’m not victim-blaming but she should have known better’. That’s just victim-blaming with extra steps. The other commenter tried to point out to you that most rapes happen from someone the victim knows to point out that it won’t really matter what they wear. The “mark” is that women shouldn’t be objectified no matter what they do or don’t do. The author of the article might have expected that with blocks on nudity and other obviously explicit content, that she would be safe. You’ve come into this thread to say ‘she should have known better’. Like, let’s put aside AI for a second. This sort of thing has been happening to women who
upload photos of themselves to the internet for a long time as well, with regular old photo editing software. Do you think they should refrain as well?
You can’t say ‘I’m not victim-blaming but she should have known better’.
And I didn’t.
You’ve come into this thread to say ‘she should have known better’.
I didn’t.
Do you think they should refrain as well?
They need to know that bad shit can happen to them if they do, that’s it.
What I did was put “even if they should have known better” in quotation marks, just like I did just now, because that’s what people MIGHT say about victims and I don’t agree with it. I honestly don’t know how I could’ve made that clearer without straying even further from the original point.
You’ve come into this thread to say ‘she should have known better’.
I didn’t.
You’re right, my mistake, you said:
You can choose settings that make your likeness private, or open to just your friends — but I figured, why not?
Because this is the internet?
She basically said “take my face, do whatever with it” and now seems surprised that people did whatever with it to get their rocks off.
Which is basically saying ‘she should have known better’ but with extra steps.
It doesn’t actually work if you say stuff that is victim-blaming but add a little disclaimer that says “I’m not victim-blaming”. Like I said, you’re thiiiis 🤏 close to getting it.
The tone of this article is weird.
Because this is the internet?
She basically said “take my face, do whatever with it” and now seems surprised that people did whatever with it to get their rocks off.
The article seems to want to portray this as unexpected, as if she didn’t expect exactly this outcome, as if this was some new, unusual thing, while at the same time insisting she knows how the internet works, Rule 34 and whatnot. “I went to People Don’t Ask For Consent Island where I know people don’t ask for consent because I’ve been a PDAFC Island journalist for years, the tour guide asked me if I was sure and if I maybe wanted to wear full body metal armour and bring weapons and stay inside the car, but I said, eh, it’ll be fine, why wouldn’t it?”
I’m not saying it’s okay for people to generate videos like that. Could at least keep it private instead of broadcasting your fantasies involving real people to the world. If someone is raped while wearing a revealing outfit, I don’t blame them, I blame the rapist. Obviously. I’d still talk to my (imaginary) children about why they should be careful and think about what they wear when they go out. Because unfortunately there are people out there who see revealing clothes as an invitation to do sex to the person inside the clothes, just like there are people who see this service as an invitation to create real-person porn.
Was this supposed to be an experiment? “I gave permission to use my face to demonstrate how easy it is for people with unusual fetishes to use it for things I may be uncomfortable with”? Why not frame it that way then instead of this weirdness?
Because I agree, this has always been a problem but that doesn’t mean we need to make it easier by making the tools freely (or cheaply) available to generate realistic porn with a few clicks. And people who may not be tech savvy need to be made aware that this WILL happen to them if they’re not careful (just like my imaginary children need to be made aware of how people might interpret their clothes).
I’m angry the article didn’t include the centaur photo.
If she’s surprised by this, I hate to warn her of what’s coming. 4chan has had threads for years of people doing x-ray or photoshop content. AI will expedite and raise the quality. I’ve seen people taking banal photos and making full porn versions of those images.
With OpenAI & likely others taking this “assume you have approval until you get outright refusal,” it’s a recipe for disaster. Any public figure can expect porn of them to exist.
At some level, people need to realize that posting things online has risk. Additionally, humans are attracted to a wide variety of things. I know some women who censor their feet in pictures or crop them out intentionally. I don’t think self censorship will help, but this author being icked when she gave a carte blanch makes me chuckle. You’re online; is this your first day here?
She didn’t seem too surprised and mentioned that women especially know that this will happen. The young kids posing with porn however, seemed a little problematic, as well as there fact that Sora explicitly (ha) blocks the creation of nudity OR sexually explicit content, but seems to have a far too narrow a definition of that.
Yeah, the article reads like she had never used the Internet and didn’t know what would happen. Lady, are you from the past?
The comparison to rape is probably not apt here. 60% of rapes are committed by someone known to the victim. It’d be more helpful to tech your imaginary kids that they can come to you no matter what, that their bodily autonomy is important, and where it’s ok for others to touch them. If you’re going to tech them elements of safety for the remaining percent, maybe focus on location, situational awareness, safety in numbers etc. Often it’s just as easy to assault someone in frumpy clothes as in more revealing clothes, and that goes for both known and unknown perpetrators.
Regarding the premise of your comment, though I don’t think it’s surprising, technically it’s the only way to know for sure what would happen. I’m not suggesting the results are groundbreaking, but there’s now at least something we can point to if we wanted evidence based reasoning to support what we all believed would happen.
Well yes, I didn’t think I had to list all the different things I’d teach my kids but that wasn’t my point anyway. I was mainly saying that I don’t blame people whose image is abused like this, even if they “should have known better than to show your face on the internet” - just like I wouldn’t blame a rape victim, even if they “should have known better than to wear that skimpy dress”.
You’re like thiiiis 🤏 close to getting it, but you still managed to miss the mark.
Um. Okay? What mark? I’d appreciate if you even gave me a hint, maybe?
You can’t say ‘I’m not victim-blaming but she should have known better’. That’s just victim-blaming with extra steps. The other commenter tried to point out to you that most rapes happen from someone the victim knows to point out that it won’t really matter what they wear. The “mark” is that women shouldn’t be objectified no matter what they do or don’t do. The author of the article might have expected that with blocks on nudity and other obviously explicit content, that she would be safe. You’ve come into this thread to say ‘she should have known better’. Like, let’s put aside AI for a second. This sort of thing has been happening to women who upload photos of themselves to the internet for a long time as well, with regular old photo editing software. Do you think they should refrain as well?
And I didn’t.
I didn’t.
They need to know that bad shit can happen to them if they do, that’s it.
What I did was put “even if they should have known better” in quotation marks, just like I did just now, because that’s what people MIGHT say about victims and I don’t agree with it. I honestly don’t know how I could’ve made that clearer without straying even further from the original point.
You’re right, my mistake, you said:
Which is basically saying ‘she should have known better’ but with extra steps.
It doesn’t actually work if you say stuff that is victim-blaming but add a little disclaimer that says “I’m not victim-blaming”. Like I said, you’re thiiiis 🤏 close to getting it.
Okay.