#effects of deepfakes

[reallytoosublime]

This video is all about the dangers of deepfake technology. In short, deepfake technology is a type of AI that is able to generate realistic, fake images of people. This technology has the potential to be used for a wide variety of nefarious purposes, from porn to political manipulation.

Deepfake technology has emerged as a significant concern in the digital age, raising alarm about its potential dangers and the need for effective detection methods. Deepfakes refer to manipulated or synthesized media content, such as images, videos, or audio recordings, that convincingly replicate real people saying or doing things they never did. While deepfakes can have legitimate applications in entertainment and creative fields, their malicious use poses serious threats to individuals, organizations, and society as a whole.

The dangers of deepfakes are not very heavily known by everyone, and this poses a threat. There is no guarantee that what you see online is real, and deepfakes have successfully lessened the gap between fake and real content. Even though the technology can be used for creating innovative entertainment projects, it is also being heavily misused by cybercriminals. Additionally, if the technology is not monitored properly by law enforcement, things will likely get out of hand quickly.

Deepfakes can be used to spread false information, which can have severe consequences for public opinion, political discourse, and trust in institutions. A realistic deepfake video of a public figure could be used to disseminate fabricated statements or actions, leading to confusion and the potential for societal unrest.

Cybercriminals can exploit deepfake technology for financial gain. By impersonating someone's voice or face, scammers could trick individuals into divulging sensitive information, making fraudulent transactions, or even manipulating people into thinking they are communicating with a trusted source.

Deepfakes have the potential to disrupt democratic processes by distorting the truth during elections or important political events. Fake videos of candidates making controversial statements could sway public opinion or incite conflict.

The Dangers of Deepfake Technology and How to Spot Them

[youtubemarketing1234]

This video is all about the dangers of deepfake technology. In short, deepfake technology is a type of AI that is able to generate realistic, fake images of people. This technology has the potential to be used for a wide variety of nefarious purposes, from porn to political manipulation.

Deepfake technology has emerged as a significant concern in the digital age, raising alarm about its potential dangers and the need for effective detection methods. Deepfakes refer to manipulated or synthesized media content, such as images, videos, or audio recordings, that convincingly replicate real people saying or doing things they never did. While deepfakes can have legitimate applications in entertainment and creative fields, their malicious use poses serious threats to individuals, organizations, and society as a whole.

The dangers of deepfakes are not very heavily known by everyone, and this poses a threat. There is no guarantee that what you see online is real, and deepfakes have successfully lessened the gap between fake and real content. Even though the technology can be used for creating innovative entertainment projects, it is also being heavily misused by cybercriminals. Additionally, if the technology is not monitored properly by law enforcement, things will likely get out of hand quickly.

Deepfakes can be used to spread false information, which can have severe consequences for public opinion, political discourse, and trust in institutions. A realistic deepfake video of a public figure could be used to disseminate fabricated statements or actions, leading to confusion and the potential for societal unrest.

Cybercriminals can exploit deepfake technology for financial gain. By impersonating someone's voice or face, scammers could trick individuals into divulging sensitive information, making fraudulent transactions, or even manipulating people into thinking they are communicating with a trusted source.

Deepfakes have the potential to disrupt democratic processes by distorting the truth during elections or important political events. Fake videos of candidates making controversial statements could sway public opinion or incite conflict.

The Dangers of Deepfake Technology and How to Spot Them

[jcmarchi]

7 Applications of AI Video in the Entertainment Industry - Technology Org

New Post has been published on https://thedigitalinsider.com/7-applications-of-ai-video-in-the-entertainment-industry-technology-org/

7 Applications of AI Video in the Entertainment Industry - Technology Org

Artificial Intelligence (AI) has revolutionized various industries, and the entertainment sector is no exception. In recent years, AI has found numerous applications in video production, enhancing creativity, efficiency, and audience engagement. From video editing to content recommendation, AI-driven technologies are transforming the way we create, distribute, and consume entertainment content. In this article, we will explore seven exciting applications of generative AI video in the entertainment industry.

Video editing. Image credit: DaleshTV via Wikimedia, CC-BY-SA-4.0

Video Editing and Post-Production

One of the most prominent applications of AI in the entertainment industry is in video editing and post-production. AI-powered editing tools can analyze video footage to automatically select the best shots, correct color and lighting, and even add special effects. For instance, Adobe’s Premiere Pro offers AI-powered features like Auto Reframe, which automatically adjusts the aspect ratio of videos for different platforms, saving creators valuable time.

Deepfake Technology

Deepfake technology, which uses AI algorithms to superimpose one person’s face onto another’s body, has garnered significant attention in the entertainment industry. While controversial, deepfakes have been used in movies and TV shows to recreate the likeness of actors who are no longer available or to de-age actors. This technology allows filmmakers to create realistic digital people and characters, opening up new creative possibilities.

Personalized Content Recommendation

AI-driven recommendation algorithms have become a staple in the entertainment industry, helping platforms like Netflix, Spotify, and YouTube suggest content tailored to individual preferences. These algorithms analyze users’ viewing habits, likes, and dislikes to recommend movies, TV shows, and music that align with their tastes. This personalized content recommendation not only enhances user experience but also keeps viewers engaged for longer periods, increasing platform revenue.

Virtual Production

AI video is also revolutionizing virtual production techniques. Filmmakers can now use AI-driven tools to create realistic virtual sets and environments. This technology allows for more cost-effective and efficient filmmaking, as it eliminates the need for physical sets and on-location shoots. Additionally, it enables real-time visualization of scenes, empowering directors and actors to make instant creative decisions.

Video Restoration and Enhancement

AI algorithms are invaluable in restoring and enhancing old or damaged video footage. Whether it’s restoring classic films or enhancing historical footage, AI-driven tools can significantly improve the quality of visuals and audio. This not only preserves valuable cultural artifacts but also offers a new way to experience old content with modern clarity and vibrancy.

Content Creation and Generation

AI-generated content is gaining traction in the entertainment industry. AI systems can analyze trends, generate scripts, and even compose music. OpenAI’s GPT-3, for example, has been used to write articles, stories, and dialogues for video games. While AI-generated content is not replacing human creativity, it can be a valuable tool for generating ideas and streamlining content creation processes.

Audience Engagement and Interaction

AI is enhancing audience engagement in various entertainment forms, including interactive videos, virtual reality experiences, and augmented reality games. Interactive storytelling powered by AI allows viewers to make choices that impact the narrative, creating personalized experiences. Virtual reality and augmented reality experiences are also made more immersive and interactive with AI, providing audiences with captivating and engaging entertainment options.

AI video technology is reshaping the entertainment industry in remarkable ways. From video editing and deepfake technology to personalized content recommendation and virtual production, AI is enhancing creativity and efficiency throughout the production process. Additionally, AI is contributing to the preservation and enhancement of historical content and generating new forms of creative expression. As AI continues to evolve, we can expect even more exciting applications in the entertainment industry, pushing the boundaries of what’s possible in the world of video and media. It’s an exciting time for both creators and audiences as AI-driven innovations continue to transform the entertainment landscape.

[cronengirly]

So I'm rewatching Ti West's X and all I can think is...

This was made for 1 million dollars. The Flash cost 200 million. Why can this movie pull off having two of the same actor in one shot but The Flash can't without turning one of them into a bizarre uncanny valley deep fake.

[shadowwingtronix]

BW's Daily Video> Corridor Crew Weighs In On The Hollywood AI Debate

BW's Daily Video> Corridor Crew Weighs In On The Hollywood AI Debate

Catch more from The Corridor Crew on YouTube  

[river-taxbird]

There is no such thing as AI.

How to help the non technical and less online people in your life navigate the latest techbro grift.

I've seen other people say stuff to this effect but it's worth reiterating. Today in class, my professor was talking about a news article where a celebrity's likeness was used in an ai image without their permission. Then she mentioned a guest lecture about how AI is going to help finance professionals. Then I pointed out, those two things aren't really related.

The term AI is being used to obfuscate details about multiple semi-related technologies.

Traditionally in sci-fi, AI means artificial general intelligence like Data from star trek, or the terminator. This, I shouldn't need to say, doesn't exist. Techbros use the term AI to trick investors into funding their projects. It's largely a grift.

What is the term AI being used to obfuscate?

If you want to help the less online and less tech literate people in your life navigate the hype around AI, the best way to do it is to encourage them to change their language around AI topics.

By calling these technologies what they really are, and encouraging the people around us to know the real names, we can help lift the veil, kill the hype, and keep people safe from scams. Here are some starting points, which I am just pulling from Wikipedia. I'd highly encourage you to do your own research.

Machine learning (ML): is an umbrella term for solving problems for which development of algorithms by human programmers would be cost-prohibitive, and instead the problems are solved by helping machines "discover" their "own" algorithms, without needing to be explicitly told what to do by any human-developed algorithms. (This is the basis of most technologically people call AI)

Language model: (LM or LLM) is a probabilistic model of a natural language that can generate probabilities of a series of words, based on text corpora in one or multiple languages it was trained on. (This would be your ChatGPT.)

Generative adversarial network (GAN): is a class of machine learning framework and a prominent framework for approaching generative AI. In a GAN, two neural networks contest with each other in the form of a zero-sum game, where one agent's gain is another agent's loss. (This is the source of some AI images and deepfakes.)

Diffusion Models: Models that generate the probability distribution of a given dataset. In image generation, a neural network is trained to denoise images with added gaussian noise by learning to remove the noise. After the training is complete, it can then be used for image generation by starting with a random noise image and denoise that. (This is the more common technology behind AI images, including Dall-E and Stable Diffusion. I added this one to the post after as it was brought to my attention it is now more common than GANs.)

I know these terms are more technical, but they are also more accurate, and they can easily be explained in a way non-technical people can understand. The grifters are using language to give this technology its power, so we can use language to take it's power away and let people see it for what it really is.

[biglisbonnews]

Robert Zemeckis Has Found His Latest Tech Tool With AI De-Aging — And That’s Good The divisive director is once again using cutting-edge technology for its own sake, and that's pretty neat. https://www.inverse.com/entertainment/robert-zemeckis-ai-de-aging-tool-good

[fandomnerd9602]

All Too Well

Actress!Wanda x Stunt!Reader

Inspired by the film ‘The Fall Guy’

You couldn’t remember what drove you and your girlfriend, the famous actress Wanda Maximoff, apart. Maybe it was the different schedules. Maybe it was the nagging feeling that an actress of her caliber deserved better than a stunt person like yourself.

So you made the biggest mistake of your life and broke up with her. If you could take it all back you would.

It had been four months since you broke up. The stunt industry was hitting a slight lull due to a bigger focus on special effects and deepfakes. So you were shocked when Tony Stark, a good friend and famous director in his own right, called you saying that he needed a stunt person of your caliber to help out on his latest blockbuster.

“You’re gonna love it (Y/N)!” He exclaimed over the phone’s speaker, “it’s the biggest film of my career and I want you for a few stunts. Two weeks, Australia, it’s perfect.”

“Fine.” You huffed, “if it was anyone else, I’d say no but…”

“Yeah yeah never say no to a Stark” even thru the speaker you could tell he was smirking.

So you boarded the overnight flight to Australia. You ran over the stunts via Zoom with Clint and Natasha - the best stunt team in the world. The first big stunt was a motorcycle crash into the bed of a truck while the lead actress rode away on her own. You'd be playing the henchman chasing her that ends up in said truck bed.

You arrived on the set the following day and go your horror, you saw her from a distance. Your ex, Wanda Maximoff. Her back was to you but you knew it was her, her reddish brown locks. You’d know her anywhere. She was talking to some British dude, she seemed happy. It broke your heart, shattered it into a million pieces.

You quickly ducked into a trailer and came face to face with Tony.

“So how was your flight?” He smirked.

“You didn’t tell me Wanda was here!” You whispered-yelled at him.

“You wouldn’t have come if I did.” He shrugged, “listen you’re the best fall person in the business. This movie needs you. And even if she doesn’t know it, Wanda needs you too”

You let your brief anger subside, "so who's the guy? Wanda seems happy"

"That's Vision, her costar"

"Vision?"

"I don't know he's European or something like that" Tony passes you a cup of coffee, "for the jet lag. Your stunt's coming up, Fall Guy"

Tony gives you a wink and heads out of his trailer. You gave it some thought. Wanda did need you. This movie had to be a success. Wanda deserved all the success, all the happiness in the world. And if you can help in some small way, that's all that mattered.

You readied yourself, crash suit, helmet, crash pads, and your sense of danger and confidence. You put down the visor and made your way to the set.

You walked past and saw Vision gently talking to Wanda, "go get it, super star"

Superstar. That was your nickname for her. You boarded your motorcycle and she boarded hers. Tony took his place behind the camera.

"Camera rolling. Speed. Action!"

Wanda revved the motorcycle and took off. You took off after her. You kept the safe distance per the plan.

"And cue motorcycle crash!" Tony called out. Wanda fired her fake gun. BLAM! BLAM! The blanks went off.

You fumbled and crashed right into the crash cushions hidden in the truck bed. Your motorcycle went up and over, according to plan and landed with a crash.

"And cut!" Tony called out. You stumbled and fell onto the street.

Wanda ran up to you, "are you alright?" She didn't even know it was you and yet she still had the same care for a stunt person. You gave her a thumbs up. Wanda's eyes went wide.

"(Y/N)?!" Wanda asked in sheer shock.

You stumbled to your feet and yanked off your helmet. "h-hey Wanda"

"And that was perfect! We're moving on!" Tony called out. The crew grabbed their gear and moved out, leaving you and Wanda staring at one another.

"I can't believe you're here" she shook her head.

"Believe me I'm in the same boat" you shrugged, "you look great"

"its the costume"

"no it's you. You look great in everything. You look good in nothing" you stuttered out.

"Same old (Y/N)" she shook her head and walked away. You could feel her slipping from your grasp yet again.

"Wanda" you called out, "I'm sorry"

She stopped dead in her tracks, "what?"

"I-I'm sorry" you apologized, "you deserved better and it looks like you're on your way to that."

"t-thank you" she whispered out before walking off. Vision approached you with a smile.

"You're (Y/N) (L/N)!" the British actor said, "I hope this is alright but I am such a fan of your stuntwork. I've looked up your reels so many times. Wanda's told me she loved working with you"

"Working. Yeah." you gave him a smile before heading off set, "it was nice meetin' you Vision."

Tony walked by and handed you a set of car keys. "Your hotel's set up on the GPS. The GMC's yours to keep" Tony gives you a genuine smile.

It was dusk. Everyone was readying to head back to their respective lodgings. You found the GMC Tony spoke of. It was GMC Sierra 1500 AT4X, pretty expensive for a little token of Tony's appreciation.

You hopped in, and immediately all your hopes came crashing down. Why did you have to mess it up? Wanda was the best thing you've ever known and now she's got that British actor Vision. All proper and well mannered.

You turned on the truck and out of all the songs the radio could've played, it just had to play All Too Well (Taylor's Version).

'Cause there we are again on that little town street You almost ran the red 'cause you were lookin' over at me Wind in my hair, I was there I remember it all too well

Your head just sunk a little. Your eyes went up and saw her walking with Vision and a couple other actors. She looked happy. How you wanted to be happy with her. Guess you'd have to be happy for her instead.

The memories just came flooding in. Every stolen moment. Every kiss. Every laugh that the two of you shared.

And maybe we got lost in translation Maybe I asked for too much But maybe this thing was a masterpiece 'til you tore it all up Running scared, I was there I remember it all too well

Tears just began running down your cheek. You lost her. And you'd never get her back.

Never again would you hold her in your arms. Share cuddle sessions in her trailer. The little brainstorming sessions that you had with her on how she could run a scene. The little stunt practices where she'd smash a prop bottle over your head. The little concern that she'd have only for you to give her your signature thumbs up.

And you call me up again just to break me like a promise So casually cruel in the name of being honest I'm a crumpled up piece of paper lying here 'Cause I remember it-

Knock! Knock! Knock! A knock at the truck's window stirred you from your thoughts. You turned to find Wanda looking at you. Her brow was fraught with concern. Her eyes still showed the same adoration and care that she had for you on your first shared film.

You rolled down the window. "um...hey" you tried to say.

"were you listening to Taylor Swift and crying?" she asked you.

"It's just how I unwind after a day of stunts" you tried to cover your tracks.

"may I come in?" she asked. You didn't hesitate to unlock the passenger door. Wanda slipped around the truck and got in.

"You never told me why" Wanda whispered. "why did you break up with me?"

"Where do I even start?" you found yourself at a loss for words.

"Just one reason."

"You deserved better. I'm a stunt person, you were on your way to becoming the starlet you are today and I-i..."

"You were an idiot"

"I know."

"I could do without a lot of things. But losing you was the worst feeling I ever went through." Wanda admits.

"I'm sorry, super star" you look her dead in the eye, "I loved you too much. I thought I would hold you back."

"We were in it together" Wanda looks you in the eyes, there wasn't a hint of anger or malice, "I wanted to be your side."

"And I wanted to be by your side too...Vision seems nice. Does he treat you right?"

"What? I'm not dating Vision."

"Wait what?"

"You thought I'd move on that quickly?" Wanda begins to giggle. Her laugh always made your heart beat out of your chest.

"I-I...um...thought so?" you found yourself blushing.

"Maybe we just needed to learn to communicate better" Wanda takes your hand, "do you think maybe we could start over?"

You offered her a genuine smile and held out your other hand, "(Y/N) professional stunt person"

Your favorite actress giggles and shakes your hand, "Wanda Maximoff. Actress and huge fan of Taylor Swift"

The two of you share a little laugh, "I really missed you Wanda"

"I missed you too...Fall Guy"

She leaned in. So did you. The mere touch of her lips sent shocks thru your whole body. How you missed her touch. The two of you became lost in one another. And this time, you'd never let her go again.

'Cause there we are again when I loved you so Back before you lost the one real thing you've ever known It was rare, I was there, I remember it all too well

Wind in my hair, you were there, you remember it all Down the stairs, you were there, you remember it all It was rare, I was there, I remember it all too well

Tony walked by, catching the sight of the GMC's windows beginning to fog up. He caught just the glimpse of you and Wanda kissing softly through the window.

"Mission accomplished" he laughed to himself as he walked to his own car.

THE END

Tags @lifespectator @olsenmyolsen @supercorpdanbeau @scarletquake-n7 @iamnicodemus @iiconicsfan25 @multi-fandom-enjoyer @pinklawyerwinnerzonk @russianredassassin @revanshand @family-house-of-m @holiday-house-of-m @ab1nsur @aloneodi

[lizbethborden]

Its so true, Dworkin and Mackinnon predicted everything about this current era. Porn has become sex now; teenage girls being bullied into anal and getting choked by boys and coerced into sending nudes at an age typically understood as one of “exploration”—now porn defines sex and sexuality; and Gail Dines and many others have talked about the deeply deadening effect of porn on empathy and the ability to recognize women as people. Porn crept ever further into the mainstream and it has totally saturated our culture, from the ‘arts’—not just streaming/TV or Lars Von Trier films, but I’m thinking of stuff as small as frames of comic books traced from porn, art distributed online traced from porn—to the personal intimate lives of human beings, women being choked, spat on, beaten—then again, even back in the 80s, men were using porn to abuse women, and the most widely available stuff was still not as vile as the porn you can find with a 2sec Google search from any phone or computer today. Deepfake porn turns all women existing in public into potential victims of violent and degrading misogynist fetishism and sexuality. OF and its ilk makes it possible for any woman to monetize herself in the form of porn and in a time of increasing economic instability, inflation, high food and gas prices, the upcoming potential loss of health insurance for millions, I’m sure it’s more appealing than ever. Porn terminology is everywhere, “MILF,” “ebony,” etc. And all of this is done under the guise of sexual liberation and free speech, and to argue against it is seen as puritanical, condescending at best, hateful, antifeminist, “SWERF”/“TERF”-y at worst. It is a demonstrated fact of the research done into porn that it shuts off vital abilities to connect with women as human beings, to empathize with women and to reject violence against us; that porn usage conditions the user into seeking out ever more intense, bizarre, violent content to use in order to achieve the same pleasure and orgasm that “vanilla” content used to do for them. What must it be doing to all of us, collectively, to have porn on every level of our culture now? What is it doing to the position of women in our society, already half citizens at best, earning significantly less than men, with our bodily autonomy stripped away in many states, being denied life-saving procedures and medications—not just mifepristone etc but even things like lupus medication and anti-inflammatories that may potentially affect us and our bodies if we chose at some point to maybe get pregnant—even being arrested for drinking or taking drugs while decidedly not pregnant because it could affect a potential fetus at some point? Are we not degraded objects already? What does it mean for us to be reduced to “cumsocks” and pornographic objects on top of all this? How deeply destructive is this society, how much further will it go to enforce the category of woman as hole, woman as receptacle, woman as vessel, woman as meat?

[leftistfeminista]

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez was in a car talking with her staffers about legislation and casually scrolling through her X mentions when she saw the photo. It was the end of February, and after spending most of the week in D.C., she was looking forward to flying down to Orlando to see her mom after a work event. But everything left her mind once she saw the picture: a digitally altered image of someone forcing her to put her mouth on their genitals. Adrenaline coursed through her, and her first thought was “I need to get this off my screen.” She closed out of it, shaken.

“There’s a shock to seeing images of yourself that someone could think are real,” the congresswoman tells me. It’s a few days after she saw the disturbing deepfake, and we’re waiting for our food in a corner booth of a retro-style diner in Queens, New York, near her neighborhood. She’s friendly and animated throughout our conversation, maintaining eye contact and passionately responding to my questions. When she tells me this story, though, she slows down, takes more pauses and plays with the delicate rings on her right hand. “As a survivor of physical sexual assault, it adds a level of dysregulation,” she says. “It resurfaces trauma, while I’m trying to — in the middle of a fucking meeting.”

The violent picture stayed in Ocasio-Cortez’s head all day. 

“There are certain images that don’t leave a person, they can’t leave a person,” she says. “It’s not a question of mental strength or fortitude — this is about neuroscience and our biology.” She tells me about scientific reports she’s read about how it’s difficult for our brains to separate visceral images on a phone from reality, even if we know they are fake. “It’s not as imaginary as people want to make it seem. It has real, real effects not just on the people that are victimized by it, but on the people who see it and consume it.”

“And once you’ve seen it, you’ve seen it,” Ocasio-Cortez says. “It parallels the same exact intention of physical rape and sexual assault, [which] is about power, domination, and humiliation. Deepfakes are absolutely a way of digitizing violent humiliation against other people.”

[thecoffeelorian]

Unsung Heroes; Unspoken Lines: Issue #2

Good morning, all, and welcome to another discussion session for all of the unsung heroes of "The Bad Batch", as well as the many plot directions that never quite made it to the small screen. As we did in our first thread, please make good use out of the comments and reblogs, as we kinda won't be able to come up with any good responses without them.

For everyone else, feel free to filter out the tag #tbb: deep dives , especially if giving a sideways glance at megacorporation-produced content isn't quite your thing. Thank you, and good morning.

And now, let's get straight into it and put on our thinking caps...

So, everybody, it’s kind of like this…

…I was tossing a few ideas for the next discussion around in my head late last week, and of course, specifically from the first season. Two examples of these had been, at least at the time, how did the Mantell Mix vendor reflect the average citizen’s response to the shiny new Imperial regime; or else did toothpick usage indicate evil behavior from major and minor characters alike. Totally random, somewhat vague thoughts to be expounded upon...and also kind of bad.

However.

It wasn’t until I read some leftover comments from around the last discussion thread, specifically from @megmca, that I was reminded of a missing key aspect of a lost canon character, as well as one whose “death” a certain amount of fans may still be hurting over, myself included. Something that just so happens to perfectly fit this latest 'Tech Tuesday', even if it's short and sweet.

Something like...Tech himself just happening to enjoy audio and video recordings as a hobby.

In other words, even if the show carrying their squad nickname never brought it up, or stranger still, left it back in the final season of The Clone Wars…Tech DID, in fact, record everything, a fact stated to be a hobby of his during the arc involving Echo, another key character in future episodes.

And boy oh boy, this is a once-cancelled possibility that now leads us straight into our next discussion--What If?

What if he recorded other things besides various examples of animal sounds, and if so, how effective would they have been in the future?

What if he could also record human/humanoid voices, and use them to generate deepfakes that could get the squad through even the toughest of Imperial checkpoints?

And third...what if a collection of past footage could crack open all the unsolved mysteries from the complete series, be it the last procedures on Kamino or else the secret files from Tantiss? Could at least one terrifying event been avoided, if not several...?

I hope that this can, at least, begin to get everyone else's thoughts out on the matter...and if so, please answer our latest Question Of The Week in either the comments or reblogs:

QOTW: How would Tech’s recording hobby have either added to/changed canon, and why?

No Pressure Tags: @theosb0rnway @brownielocks69 @alwaysflexfoampads @lucky-ducky006 @travellingnorthwards

@moe-oh @depeachy @petrivbatig @sadiecoocoo @maddyknight28

@traveller-of-word-and-screen @greyangelpain @tbnrpotato @lilithastar @sillishit

@techs-goggles9902 @amandamadeathing @number1morphfan @darthbecky726 and any other interested fans who might want to sound off.

[end notes: I basically finished typing this at around 9 pm last night, so I hope I didn't go too all over the place here. ^^; Thank you.]

[gacha-incels]

article from the english edition of the Hankyoreh September 9 2024

archive link

plain text

“My life is not your porn” and “Deepfake is murder” — these were some of the chants heard in a mix of Korean, English, and Chinese on the night of Sept. 3 (local time), directed at the South Korean Embassy in the UK. 

Over 100 people, including women from South Korea, China, Japan, and others from around the world, gathered that evening at Trafalgar Square in London. They marched from there, passing Buckingham Palace, and continued to the South Korean Embassy, calling for measures to address the ongoing deepfake sex crime crisis plaguing South Korea.

The march was organized by Chinese feminists based in London, who voiced their support for South Korean women fighting against digital sex crimes, such as deepfakes and illegal filming. Their aim was to raise awareness among women worldwide about these crimes occurring in South Korea.

In a post on their Instagram account (@weareallchainedwomen), the organizers wrote, “The illegal use of hidden cameras and deepfake technology by men to turn women’s everyday lives into pornography is not just a social issue in Korea; it is a widespread problem globally, particularly in East Asian countries.” They also said, “In China, the bravery of Korean feminists has long inspired many to awaken,” adding, “We hope to become each other’s strongest and most loyal sisters, supporting each other to overthrow the patriarchy together!”

A 42-year-old woman from South Asia participating in the march said, “I came out today because I believe in the importance of solidarity among women worldwide, who are all suffering from the effects of misogyny and patriarchy.” The woman, a youth educator and social activist, urged the South Korean government to “introduce new curricula into the education system that teach about women’s safety, online safety, digital sex crimes, the influence of the porn industry, healthy relationships, and gender roles and stereotypes.”

A 27-year-old Korean participant, who works as a documentary filmmaker in the UK, said, “I am standing in front of the South Korean Embassy with a heavy heart” and expressed hope that the “government will strongly punish the perpetrators and accomplices and seek justice for the victims.”

In Tokyo, Japan, Chinese feminists living there also held a rally in front of the South Korean Embassy on Saturday afternoon, calling for attention to the digital sex crimes crisis in Korea.

By Park Hyun-jung, staff reporter

[jcmarchi]

Tech policy is only frustrating 90% of the time

New Post has been published on https://thedigitalinsider.com/tech-policy-is-only-frustrating-90-of-the-time/

Tech policy is only frustrating 90% of the time

Many technologists stay far away from public policy. That’s understandable. In our experience, most of the time when we engage with policymakers there is no discernible impact. But when we do make a difference to public policy, the impact is much bigger than what we can accomplish through academic work. So we find it fruitful to engage even if it feels frustrating on a day-to-day basis.

In this post, we summarize some common reasons why many people are cynical about tech policy and explain why we’re cautiously optimistic. We also announce some recent writings on tech policy as well as an upcoming event for policymakers in Washington D.C., called AI Policy Precepts.

Some people want more tech regulation and others want less. But both sides seem to mostly agree that policymakers are bad at regulating tech: because they don’t have tech expertise; or because tech moves too rapidly for law to keep up; or because policymakers are bad at anticipating the effects of regulation. 

While these claims have a kernel of truth, they aren’t reasons for defeatism. It’s true that most politicians don’t have deep technical knowledge. But their job is not to be subject matter experts. The details of legislation are delegated to staffers, many of whom are experts on the subject. Moreover, much of tech policy is handled by agencies such as the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), which do have tech experts on their staff. There aren’t enough, but that’s being addressed in many ways. Finally, while federal legislators and agencies get the most press, a lot happens on the state and local levels.

Besides, policy does not have to move at the speed of tech. Policy is concerned with technology’s effect on people, not the technology itself. And policy has longstanding approaches to protecting humans that can be adapted to address new challenges from tech. For example, the FTC has taken action in response to deceptive claims made by AI companies under its existing authority. Similarly, the answer to AI-enabled discrimination is the enforcement of long-established anti-discrimination law. Of course, there are some areas where technology poses new threats, and that might require changes to laws, but that’s relatively rare.

In short, there is nothing exceptional about tech policy that makes it harder than any other type of policy requiring deep expertise. If we can do health policy or nuclear policy, we can do tech policy. Of course, there are many reasons why all public policy is slow and painstaking, such as partisan gridlock, or the bias towards inaction built into the structure of the government due to checks and balances. But none of these factors are specific to tech policy.

To be clear, we are not saying that all regulations or policies are useful—far from it. In past essays, we have argued against specific proposals for regulating AI. And there’s a lot that can be accomplished without new legislation. The October 2023 Executive Order by the Biden administration tasked over 50 agencies with 150 actions, showing the scope of existing executive authority.

We work at Princeton’s Center for Information Technology Policy. CITP is home to interdisciplinary researchers who look at tech policy from different perspectives. We have also begun working closely with the D.C. office of Princeton’s School of Public and International Affairs. Recently, we have been involved in a few collaborations on informing tech policy:

Foundation model transparency reports: In a Stanford-MIT-Princeton collaboration, we propose a structured way for AI companies to release key information about their foundation models. We draw inspiration from transparency reporting in social media, financial reporting, and FDA’s adverse event reporting. We use the set of 100 indicators developed in the 2023 Foundation Model Transparency Index.

We analyze how the 100 indicators align with six existing proposals on AI: Canada’s Voluntary Code of Conduct for generative AI, the EU AI Act, the G7 Hiroshima Process Code of Conduct for AI, the U.S. Executive Order on AI, the U.S. Foundation Model Transparency Act, and the U.S. White House voluntary AI commitments. 43 of the 100 indicators in our proposal are required by at least one proposal, with the EU AI Act requiring 30 of the 100 proposed indicators. 

We also found that transparency requirements in government policies can lack specificity: they do not detail how precisely developers should report quantitative information, establish standards for reporting evaluations, or account for differences across modalities. We provide an example of what Foundation Model Transparency Reports could look like to help sharpen what information AI developers must provide. Read the paper here. 

New Jersey Assembly hearing on deepfakes: Last month, Sayash testified before the New Jersey Assembly on reducing harm from deepfakes. We were asked to provide our opinion on four bills creating penalties and mitigations for non-consensual deepfakes. The hearing included testimonies from four experts in intellectual property, tech policy, civil rights, and constitutional law. 

We advocated for collecting better evidence on the impact of AI-generate deepfakes, content provenance standards to help prove that a piece of media is human-created (as opposed to watermarking to prove it is AI-generated), and bolstering defenses on downstream surfaces such as social media. We also cautioned against relying too much on the non-proliferation of powerful AI as a solution—as we’ve argued before, it is likely to be infeasible and ineffective. Read the written testimony here.

Open models and open research: We submitted a response to the National Telecommunications and Information Administration on its request for comments on openness in AI, in collaboration with various academic and civil society members. Our response built on our paper and policy brief analyzing the societal impact of open foundation models. We were happy to see this paper being cited in responses by several industry and civil society organizations, including the Center for Democracy and Technology, Mozilla, Meta, and Stability AI. Read our response here.

We also contributed to a comment to the copyright office in support of a safe harbor exemption for generative AI research, based on our paper and open letter (signed by over 350 academics, researchers, and civil society members). Read our comment here.

AI safety and existential risk. We’ve analyzed several aspects of AI safety in our recent writing: the impact of openness, the need for safe harbors, and the pitfalls of model alignment. Another major topic of policy debate is on the existential risks posed by AI. We’ve been researching this question for the past year and plan to start writing about it in the next few weeks.

AI policy precepts. CITP has launched a non-partisan program to explore the core concepts, opportunities, and risks underlying AI that will shape federal policy making for the next ten years. The sessions will be facilitated by Arvind alongside CITP colleagues Matthew Salganik, and Mihir Kshirsagar. The size is limited to about 18 participants, with policymakers drawn from Congressional offices and Federal agencies. We will explore predictive and generative AI, moving beyond familiar talking points and examining real world case studies. Participants will come away with frameworks to address future challenges, as well as the opportunity to establish relationships with a cohort of policymakers. See here for more information and here to nominate yourself or a colleague. The deadline for nomination is this Friday, April 5.

We thank Mihir Kshirsagar for feedback on a draft of this post. Link to cover image: Source

[all-souls-matinee]

BONUS Halloween in August/September Review: Alien: Romulus (2024)

[Eschewing my usual format of 1-2 sentence summary + 1-2 paragraphs of thoughts, this one will be a combination to include several spoilers. It also assumes some prior knowledge of the Alien franchise]

Going into Romulus I was leery of how video game-y the trailer felt and the choice of a director best known for 'subverted expectations' home invasion horror, but those were the two aspects of it I ended up really liking. The premise is that a group of 20-somethings are stuck in an intergalactic mining town where the amount of missions they must fly hours they must work to gain an emigration permit is raised by a few years each time they reach their goal. Our protagonist, Rain, is told by a friend that he and his crew have discovered the wreck of the Nostromo floating above them and plan to break in and steal its cryochambers; the last thing they need for their own ship to make an escape into deep space. The crew welcomes her, but admit that what they really need is her adoptive brother Andy, an ill-liked synthetic who can access the Nostromo's controls. So far so good, I love this premise! It's a little YA dystopia, we've got a ragtag group of mining orphans that look like TikTok influencers and don't have personalities, but that's okay- acceptable and even expected for an Alien movie. I'm also not here to clutch pearls over the sanctity of the original; everything that follows plot-wise is good stuff! Reminiscent of video games, yes, but that means lots of clever little item pickups and interactions, and the tension-building is excellent. An early example: while collecting cryofuel half the team is trapped in a room full of slowly thawing, unseen facehuggers. The other half must retrieve a master-key computer chip from Ash's body (left over from the original mission) to pass to Andy, who is then stuck in reboot mode and unable to help until a critical moment, and this all filmed brilliantly with great effects. There are several standout scenes like it; the movie feels connected to the rest of franchise while contributing new ideas- playing with gravity and temperature and electricity as both weapons and stumbling blocks. It looks good, I like individual plot beats (including the contentious climax), I love the multiple dead rat puppets that are here for some reason, but this is also the only movie I've considered walking out of.

No one barring David Jonsson (Andy) can act, and chemistry is nonexistent. We're told that the crew is composed of friends, siblings, cousins, and love interests, but never actually see it, and no matter how good the plot and pacing are on paper that really makes things drag in places. I like the aliens and love the androids in these movies, but at the end of the day I've always ended up rooting for the humans because of the empathy on display. Many of the Aliens are objectively worse than Romulus from a filmmaking perspective, but this is the first one where I wanted the bad guys to win.

The main villain of this movie isn't the aliens, it's Ash. I was spoiled on CGI Deepfaked* Ian Holm going in, so when they boarded the Nostromo and saw his body I rolled my eyes and braced myself for a scene where he comes to life like a haunted house prop and then they kill him or whatever, but no, he sticks around and drives the entire plot. It's awful; I don't even hate this one from a writing perspective it just feels insanely disrespectful (and is distractingly bad to look at.)

3. The Green Mile is one of my most hated movies of all time. I revisited it early this year when the podcast Just King Things discussed the book within the context of Stephen King's larger body of work, which stresses the character of John Coffey not as an aberration but a trope King keeps coming back to: a black or disabled person who is a holy innocent. Physical prowess and/or magic powers are coupled with the disposition of a character like Of Mice and Men's Lennie or Flowers for Algernon's Charlie to create someone who looks scary but is actually worthy of love because, hey guys, he's nice and sympathetic in a way that appeals to an imagined white American audience. Months after listening to that episode I accidentally walked into an even broader literary context, discovering the character of Jean in E.E. Cummings's The Enormous Room (a nearly 1:1 blueprint for Coffey), and Pip in Moby-Dick, a child traumatized to a point of babbling incoherence that allows him to act as a holy conduit, a prophet, and a comfort to his captain. These characters aren't meant to be racist but rather to teach about antiblack racism, which makes for interesting reading, but a terrible Alien movie.

Andy is the only black character in this film. Andy is referred to as Rain's brother at most twice, then revealed to be her servant (literally programmed by her father to do two things- protect her and make dad jokes.) Andy is cognitively and physically disabled from being rebooted so many times over the years, and faces extra abuse and discrimination because of this. I cannot begin to describe how it felt to have spent the year bumping into saintly black characters in media who are dehumanized in order to teach some vague platitude about humanity, only to run into it again here. It gets worse and more muddled when Andy is rebooted using Ash's chip, which makes him "normal," which makes him evil. Ash uses him to further the interests of Weyland rather than his sister/master Rain and it makes him start saying scary inhuman stuff like 'the solution to the trolley problem is to kill as few people as possible.' (Again, go bad guys.)

I know the movie doesn't see itself as racist. Andy is by far the most interesting character and has a lot of complexity to him; Rain's whole arc is learning that no one should have seen him as expendable or treated him as an inferior, and tells him his new prime directive is to live for himself (as well as her. Can't leave that on the table.) Alverez clearly had the best of intentions, but the movie can't get away from the fact that Andy being cognitively impaired and using his strength and powers to the benefit of some random white girl, choosing family over work but also the individual over the collective, was actually what made him human.

Okay rant over. I liked the part where they threw a flair and the facehuggers scurried after it like a pack of dogs because they hunt by body heat and movement instead of by smell and vision. Yay :-)

*Holm was deepfaked 'respectfully' with the consent of his family using a combination of animatronic and a new actor... and the company literally responsible for deepfakes (https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-features/alien-romulus-ian-holm-rook-ash-ai-1235982350.) I cannot stress enough how bad this is to look at for almost 2 hours like i needed to talk about Andy but jesus christ.

[mariacallous]

There were many takeaways from the first debate between Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald J. Trump. As a number of expected policy issues dominated the conversation, Harris effectively filled in the blanks for voters on her strategies to fix the economy, restore reproductive rights, and address immigration and border security concerns. Many in the media have commented on her strong performance, but the crowning moment of the night was Taylor Swift’s immediate political endorsement of Kamala Harris. The American pop superstar has not only surpassed other artists in music awards and public reach, but has become one of the most influential figures to young people and others who are equally inspired by her talent and grit.

Many have been waiting for the endorsements of well-known and influential artists like Swift and Beyoncé. My colleague, Darrell West, forecasted that the blessings of these artists could shift the campaign in Harris’ favor. In recent months, Beyoncé has quietly supported the vice president by allowing her music to be played at campaign rallies. And immediately following the debate, Taylor Swift not only endorsed Harris for president, but also signed her lengthy post as “Childless Cat Lady” to mimic Trump’s running mate J.D. Vance’s widely ridiculed reference to women without children.

But within her endorsement, Swift also sent a loud message to Trump, those in Big Tech, and others who willingly use artificial intelligence (AI) to extract, clone, and mimic content and the likenesses of celebrities like her. She shared her own fears about AI after being a recent target of the Trump campaign and vowed to be more vocal in efforts to thwart misinformation—an issue that has continued to fester in the absence of congressional action.

Taylor Swift has been a target of deceptive AI

Swift has not been immune from deceptive AI-generated content. Earlier this year, she was the subject of explicit AI-generated images that were circulated across social media platforms, mainly X (formerly known as Twitter). Those posts received more than 47 million views in less than 24 hours, and that was before the account was suspended and the images were saved to be shared via other channels online. Issues of fake pornography and revenge porn on social media sites have served to embarrass female artists and business leaders. In the case of Swift’s sexually exploitative content, the hashtag #TaylorSwiftAI trended and led to a rush on her behalf for legal removal, which by then was too late, given the propensity of consumers to download objectionable content and share false information with their own networks.

At the heart of the controversy may have been a group of online users who started operating on Telegram, which is now facing legal scrutiny for allegedly facilitating illegal online activities. But what comes through in Swift’s denouncement of AI is that she has had enough of its harmful consequences, especially the disturbing deepfakes which reveal a troubling side of the internet where anyone can create and disseminate nude, pornographic, and photorealistic images or other content of celebrities with commercially available AI software. Some would argue that increased access to commercial technology is good for the public as we seek to make online tools more readily available to everyday people. In my new book, “Digitally Invisible: How the Internet is Creating the New Underclass,” I suggest that the shift from analog to digital services not only enabled disruption, but also enabled other uses of technology—some of which were unforeseen. But just because individuals have access to these potentially harmful tools, people like Swift are not necessarily endorsing bad behaviors.

It was the more recent use of her likeness and image that the Trump campaign shared which sent her over the edge. Various AI-generated images of her and her fans, known as “Swifties,” falsely showed them endorsing Trump for president. Many of these photos, which showed young women in T-shirts displaying a Trump endorsement, started on Truth Social, Trump’s social media platform, and quickly ended up on other platforms. But this type of inappropriate behavior was neither alarming nor unexpected by Trump allies and influencers. These AI-generated images are part of a long list of other AI-powered election disinformation, including a post which depicted Harris on the beach with now-deceased sexual predator Jeffrey Epstein. In the interest of not sharing more false information, I won’t be providing a link to this content.

In her social media post, Swift also made it clear that the deceptive and illegal use of her name and image by the Trump campaign was daunting. She shared on her post that “[i]t really conjured up my fears around AI, and the dangers of spreading misinformation.” She followed this emotion by writing: “[t]he simplest way to combat misinformation is with the truth,” which should prompt urgent actions to tackle this issue.

What Congress and the global public should take away from Taylor Swift

For years, Congress has debated over the most appropriate legislative measures to quell mis- and disinformation. In 2019, Congress introduced the first version of the DEEP FAKES Accountability Act, which was designed to establish criminal penalties for individuals thought to be producing deepfakes and other illegal content without related disclosure or digital watermarking to determine the provenance of content and urged the removal of such content by violators. In 2022, Congress introduced the Educating against Misinformation and Disinformation Act, which proposed a commission to support information and media literacy resources. That same year, the first version of the Algorithmic Accountability Act was introduced, and re-introduced in 2023, to address the impacts of AI systems to bring more transparency to automated systems, as well as improved auditing.

In addition to several other bipartisan bills to address deceptive AI-generated content, in summer 2024, a bill called the Content Origin Protection and Integrity from Edited and Deepfaked Media Act (COPIED ACT) came out of the U.S. Senate to protect a range of creators. The proposed bill would combat harmful deepfakes, for which election manipulation could be considered a use case, and implement federal transparency guidance for making, authenticating, and detecting AI-generated content. The bill is specifically targeted to protect journalists, actors, and artists from AI-driven theft of their creative content.

But given that the presidential election is only two months away, the provision of legal protections is not in the immediate future. Instead, it is highly likely that there will be more, and not less, misinformation created and leveraged to wage character attacks and accelerate voter manipulation. In fact, the web of online misinformation is so strong that Trump’s false reference during the debate to the eating habits of Haitian immigrants in a small Ohio town went viral the minute he shared the conspiracy theory.

In their new book, “Lies that Kill: A Citizen’s Guide to Disinformation,” co-authors Elaine Kamarck and Darrell West propose that everyday people need to better understand these falsehoods to effectively navigate the truth, and the only way that can be done is by educating citizens on what to look for and how to protect themselves. Taylor Swift may have started that process by stirring reactions even among legislators to do something about this growing problem. If her call to action is not enough, her fans will definitely be chiming in next.