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

Stop developing this technology

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 410 posts

Re: Stop developing this technology

#281

Post by elondaits »

_djo_ wrote: post #274
pc86 wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No they're not and this flippant dismissal is so intellectually lazy. The ability to scam people exists and isn't going away. People went town to town in covered wagons selling bullshit. People scammed others out of money centuries before that. The answer isn't pearl-clutching nonsense about how this technology is so different and so morally reprehensible compared to everything else. The answer is education. If someo…

We're steadily breaking down all mechanisms that ordinary people can use to trust information they're getting, such as getting a video call from a member of their family and recognising the face and voice. All previous scams relied on con artists using various means to pretend to either be trustworthy in their own right despite being strangers or as representing some trustworthy institution. But having people being a…

In Argentina they’ve been scamming people by pretending to be a relative for years now! No AI required. Somebody calls you in the middle of night, distraught, and crying says “mom?” or “dad?”. Then someone interrupts, claims your son or daughter has been abducted (by now you probably have given them their name when responding to the initial plea) and requests money to be dropped at some location where a motorcycle picks it up. They make you stay on the line so you can’t call the cops nor the allegedly abducted person.

These calls usually are made from prison, with an outside accomplice. They are rarely caught.

People are sleepy, and concerned, and swear the voice they heard was the one of their child.

Another no-ai popular scam is done by stealing a WhatsApp account (e.g. by cloning the sim), and then contacting a friend or relative asking for a quick cash transfer for something urgent, to be returned the next day.

Deepfakes might make these scams more believable, but the core causes of the issue and the solutions have not changed.

Re: Stop developing this technology

#282

Post by theossuary »

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #244
lucumo wrote: post #92

There's a book in Dutch literature, The Assault by Harry Mulisch. It's a great read if you're interested in multi-faceted morality. It deals with guilt and responsibility when there's a chain of things that need to happen for a bad outcome. During WWII the protagonist's parents are shot by Germans after a body of a collaborator was found in front of their house. The parents were arguing with the soldiers about someth…

In my experience, in the US, the lawyers will find the "deep pockets" to go after, and may establish precedent. In the US, we have the Second Amendment, which has probably prevented many, many lawsuits against gun manufacturers and dealers (but there have still been a few). Unless there's a constitutional amendment, protecting the tech, it's pretty likely that some hungry lawyers will figure out how to go up the food…

The second amendment doesn't prevent lawsuits against gun manufactures. The PLCA, passed in 2005, is what provides special legal cover to the gun industry.

If you'll allow me to be cynical for a moment; I believe the PLCA was passed because the people in power felt safe from guns, behind their security and metal detectors. I don't think they feel safe from deep fakes or hackers (nor is there much lobbying money), so a similar law protecting technology would never pass.

[1]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protection_of_Lawful_Commerc...

Re: Stop developing this technology

#283

Post by DennisP »

Everything people fear about deepfakes has been true of text for the entire history of writing. We've a brief period in human history during which you could mostly believe data you received from afar, without having to trust the source, because telling a lie with video was much harder than telling a lie with text. Now it's almost as easy to tell a lie with video so we'll have to check sources again. Somehow I think we'll survive.

Re: Stop developing this technology

#284

Post by SamoyedFurFluff »

sneak wrote: post #241
4ggr0 wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you agree that most people wouldn't like to find a nude video of themselves online? Now why does it make a difference if the video is real or not? It's still a video of a nude body with your face on it. I find this whole deepfake-porn trend to be incredibly disgusting. And it just saddens me that heterosexual males apparently immediately have to exploit such things for their own hornyness. I guess this is also the…

I think that most people would not care if a video is posted online of them if the video is in fact fake. Would you care if someone posted a nude image of someone with your face photoshopped on it? If so, why?

Have you asked the people this happened to or are you just making assumptions? It’s important to critically examine our own biases in things like this, particularly if we have no idea why something evokes a strong emotional reaction.

Re: Stop developing this technology

#285

Post by specialist »

LeanderK wrote: post #238

Again and again I am astonished that people without ethics exist, that they are confident in what they are doing and that they appear to be completely unable to reflect upon their actions. They just don't care and appear to be proud of it. If this is used to scam old people out of their belongings then you really have to question your actions and imho bear some responsibility. Was it worth it? Do the positive uses ou…

> ...astonished that people without ethics exist

"Moral intelligence" (or "MQ") and "moral cripples".

...are my provisional terms for talking about this.

Re: Stop developing this technology

#286

Post by JohnFen »

sneak wrote: post #241
4ggr0 wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you agree that most people wouldn't like to find a nude video of themselves online? Now why does it make a difference if the video is real or not? It's still a video of a nude body with your face on it. I find this whole deepfake-porn trend to be incredibly disgusting. And it just saddens me that heterosexual males apparently immediately have to exploit such things for their own hornyness. I guess this is also the…

I think that most people would not care if a video is posted online of them if the video is in fact fake. Would you care if someone posted a nude image of someone with your face photoshopped on it? If so, why?

> I think that most people would not care if a video is posted online of them if the video is in fact fake.

I think most people would care a lot. After all, it doesn't matter if it's fake or not, if matters if anyone you care about thinks it's real. And some almost certainly will.

Re: Stop developing this technology

#287

Post by toss1 »

pc86 wrote: post #267
fps_doug wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're exactly proving the point GP makes, good job.

No they're not and this flippant dismissal is so intellectually lazy. The ability to scam people exists and isn't going away. People went town to town in covered wagons selling bullshit. People scammed others out of money centuries before that. The answer isn't pearl-clutching nonsense about how this technology is so different and so morally reprehensible compared to everything else. The answer is education. If someo…

>>The ability to scam people exists and isn't going away.

True, but giving the scammers orders-of-magnitude better tools can have serious consequences. If you already have a plague of robbers in your town, handing out free automatic handguns and ammo to anyone is beyond stupid. Yet this is pretty much what these AI tools give to scammers.

Arguing that people will eventually figure it out is no justification for allowing it. It ignores all the casualties in the meantime. This is especially bad because the result of this scale of weaponized technology may well be a complete destruction of trust in society, or in technology in general. These are catastrophic for everyone in society and the economy.

Re: Stop developing this technology

#288

Post by JohnFen »

suilied wrote: post #170
jakelazaroff wrote: post #3

Regardless of what I think about this technology in particular, I want to respond to this line from the second comment: [1] > on the contrary, it must be developed. No, it mustn’t. There’s not a gun to your head, forcing you to do this. You want to develop this technology. That’s why it’s happening. Technology isn’t inevitable. It’s a choice we make. And we can go in circles about whether it’s good or bad, but at lea…

I understand the sentiment but I disagree. It's just another disruptive piece of technology that people will have to adjust to. If you can't trust a digital face, then nobody will and using this tech for scamming purposes will simply fizzle out after an initial "adjustment period". I know that sounds rough but society might react differently than you think, i.e.: with digital faces being useless for identifying peopl…

> Don't fight progress in the hopes you can one day become complacent.

I'm not convinced this represents "progress". That aside, the goal of resisting it isn't to allow you to become complacent some day. The goal is to avoid being harmed.

Re: Stop developing this technology

#289

Post by JohnFen »

bayindirh wrote: post #185
suilied wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand the sentiment but I disagree. It's just another disruptive piece of technology that people will have to adjust to. If you can't trust a digital face, then nobody will and using this tech for scamming purposes will simply fizzle out after an initial "adjustment period". I know that sounds rough but society might react differently than you think, i.e.: with digital faces being useless for identifying peopl…

I don't see a difference between any technology. So if we can frown upon some nation for developing nukes, we can frown upon a group people for developing this. On the other hand somebody can say "if we don't, then others will". So regulate and ban the technology, then.

"If we don't, then others will" is a bankrupt argument put forth by people who are trying to justify doing things they know are harmful. It would be more legitimate if it were "we won't, but others will".

Re: Stop developing this technology

#290

Post by specialist »

suilied wrote: post #170
jakelazaroff wrote: post #3

Regardless of what I think about this technology in particular, I want to respond to this line from the second comment: [1] > on the contrary, it must be developed. No, it mustn’t. There’s not a gun to your head, forcing you to do this. You want to develop this technology. That’s why it’s happening. Technology isn’t inevitable. It’s a choice we make. And we can go in circles about whether it’s good or bad, but at lea…

I understand the sentiment but I disagree. It's just another disruptive piece of technology that people will have to adjust to. If you can't trust a digital face, then nobody will and using this tech for scamming purposes will simply fizzle out after an initial "adjustment period". I know that sounds rough but society might react differently than you think, i.e.: with digital faces being useless for identifying peopl…

Disruptive technology disrupts. Society and culture as well as markets.

How many generations did it take for society to adapt to the industrial revolution? What were the spasms which occurred during that period?

As for deepfakes, we know before we even begin that it breaks (utterly moots) social norms about identity, trust, reputation.

How many people are going to die while societies adapt?

Is that price acceptable for the benefit of more amusing viral videos on TikTok?

Post reply on HN