Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

AI-generated 'poverty porn' fake images being used by aid agencies

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 222 posts

Re: AI-generated 'poverty porn' fake images being used by aid agencies

#201

Post by I-M-S »

readthenotes1 wrote: post #126
dgb23 wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we're thinking of the same picture: That kid is real, it has a severe condition that needs medical attention. It's not the general case, but an extreme one, but that doesn't make the problems any less urgent.

It was supposed to show the starvation affecting kids in Gaza though, right? I assume kids are starving there, but I have to wonder why the photographer picked a distortion and not a representative pic

A while ago I saw a photo of Nancy Pelosi on the Congress floor with a walker. I later learned the picture was deepfaked. But in a way it was more true than a real photograph.

Re: AI-generated 'poverty porn' fake images being used by aid agencies

#202

Post by intrasight »

sailfast wrote: post #144
intrasight wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We will look back on this age as the one of the uncanny valley before smart screens and speakers arrived that auto-detect and warn about AI generated content.

That’s a nice thought - but I think that screen and speaker makers will be incentivized to explicitly NOT do that through their partnerships with the AI and other conglomerate companies that will be building these tools. (If not flat-out be purchased by AI companies under the guise of safety for those that want it while they quietly nerf the technology)

Their incentive is to sell screens. If there is a screen maker what filters these out, then I (and I assume many other people) would buy their screen.

Re: AI-generated 'poverty porn' fake images being used by aid agencies

#203

Post by AuthAuth »

bradley13 wrote: post #96

I'm sure that some (few) of these NGOs do good work. However, sooner or later, they all seem to succumb to two problems: (1) excessive staff costs, and (2) a failure of incentives. The second one is more insidious: If they solved the problem they address, they would no longer need to exist. They have no incentive to succeed. So they go around addressing individual problems, taking sad pictures, and avoid addressing s…

The issue is that their incentive is on marketing more than problem solving. A good NGO can blend actual solutions into snappy marketing campaigns. Like its expensive time/effort wise to push for legislative change on an issue but its "cheap" to throw a few grand at a group of down trodden people and take some photos.

Re: AI-generated 'poverty porn' fake images being used by aid agencies

#204

Post by lunias »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #159
lunias wrote: post #156

So... the images used to be staged, but now they're generated? Seems like not much has changed and the onus still lies with the targeted to think critically about the motivation behind why they've been targeted. That being said, false advertising is a thing; and I think we need to enforce it in instances where people are clearly being misled intentionally.

Generating is much easier than staging. So we're going to see far more fake than we used to.

This is true, but for the moment (big caveat - probably won't be this way forever) it's easier to distinguish the generated than the staged.

Re: AI-generated 'poverty porn' fake images being used by aid agencies

#205

Post by nradov »

throwaway48476 wrote: post #191
nradov wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those are not alternatives. VPNs and botnets already exist. We have minimal practical ability to control Internet traffic or transactions between most foreign countries. All it takes is a single compromised device in the USA for the scam traffic to get through.

There are very few transatlantic cables that carry all of the internet. It would be very easy to cut them. VPNs don't make any difference.

Come on, be serious. No one is going to cut any transatlantic cables just to prevent scams. VPNs make a huge difference: as long as you can get a route out somewhere then you can use a VPN (possibly to a compromised host) to make your traffic appear to be coming from another source.

Re: AI-generated 'poverty porn' fake images being used by aid agencies

#206

Post by anonymars »

nradov wrote: post #198
anonymars wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're making my point -- is the fact that the putative job offer is for a blockchain company truly relevant to that story? What would stop them from making it an "AI company" or whatever else is the hot topic du jour? I concede that the relevance is perhaps that if you're going to try and steal cryptowallets, you would want to select for people more likely to be crypto-adjacent, but still. It was a novel att…

If course it's relevant. In evaluating the trustworthiness of any communication you have to consider the reputation and authenticity of the source. If someone asked you to interview with a money laundering company would you accept?

How is that relevant? If I get a fake offer from a fake company claiming to solve world hunger, does that mean I don't need to be careful about this previously unknown attack vector?

Do you think scammers can only leverage dodgy industries?

Re: AI-generated 'poverty porn' fake images being used by aid agencies

#207

Post by [deleted] »

autoexec wrote: post #134
wmeredith wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Take AI out of the conversation. Now revisit the argument that it's OK for people to make fake pics, testimonials, stories, and videos to solicit donations. I'm pretty sure that's just called a con or perhaps fraud in legal terms.

Would hand drawn illustrations of a starving child or a battered woman be fraud if they were used to help raise money that was going to feed actual starving children or help battered women?

[deleted]

Re: AI-generated 'poverty porn' fake images being used by aid agencies

#208

Post by throwaway48476 »

nradov wrote: post #205
throwaway48476 wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are very few transatlantic cables that carry all of the internet. It would be very easy to cut them. VPNs don't make any difference.

Come on, be serious. No one is going to cut any transatlantic cables just to prevent scams. VPNs make a huge difference: as long as you can get a route out somewhere then you can use a VPN (possibly to a compromised host) to make your traffic appear to be coming from another source.

You can't VPN on a non existent path. Or bomb them. All it takes is an actual desire to stop scammers.

Re: AI-generated 'poverty porn' fake images being used by aid agencies

#209

Post by rurp »

bradley13 wrote: post #96

I'm sure that some (few) of these NGOs do good work. However, sooner or later, they all seem to succumb to two problems: (1) excessive staff costs, and (2) a failure of incentives. The second one is more insidious: If they solved the problem they address, they would no longer need to exist. They have no incentive to succeed. So they go around addressing individual problems, taking sad pictures, and avoid addressing s…

I don't think #2 really applies for many/most orgs, since so many causes don't really have a hard and fast solution, but instead exist on a spectrum. Think of a group trying to end poverty or protect nature. Those problems will never be truly solved but they can go much better or worse.

Re: AI-generated 'poverty porn' fake images being used by aid agencies

#210

Post by DontForgetMe »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #90
jnovek wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn’t describe it as the correct response, more like “the best one we can think of right now.” Living this way is that it’s really exhausting, saps quite a lot of joy out of life and makes people more lonely. It’s far from optimal and a more sustainable option would be to work our way back to the community trust we used to enjoy just ~30 years ago.

There is an alternative. Remain open - cautiously, but open. This may mean you get scammed. (I mean, be more careful with larger amounts...) But when you get scammed, remain open anyway . Yeah, you can lose some money that way. But the alternative is "really exhausting, saps quite a lot of joy out of life and makes people more lonely", so even losing some money could be a net win overall.

Yeah, I'm pretty cynical online but in real life I actively choose to err on the side of trust. It just makes things easier.

I've had some annoying incidents from it, but surprisingly few terrible consequences.

If you spend your time with people who don't value honesty, then you'd probably need to be less trusting. If you weren't great at spotting subtleties, vibes, norms etc, same. If you or the people around you had a reputation for being distrustful, if you looked unusually threatening / objectionable, if people had a specific distrust of you, then it could cause more trouble. Even in big cities, low-trust / high crime societies, dangerous circumstances or new environments, probably best to dial up the caution.

But in everyday life in a medium-large western European city? Your bag probably won't get stolen. The dodgy looking guy asking about your phone probably does just want to see the model. The pack of teens probably don't realise they're being so loud, and the acquaintance complaining about their bank glitch probably will pay you back the money if you loan it.

'Probably' isn't much consolation when you're being stabbed to death, but then, we assume that we 'probably' won't get hit by a runaway car or choke on this sandwich or slip on that ice, life is a series of calculated risks and in my opinion, most humans in real life are far nicer than one might think, from the internet.

Post reply on HN