> Ireland fast tracks Bill Poor Bill, what did he do to deserve this?
He got thoughted.
Ireland fast tracks Bill to criminalise harmful voice or image misuse
31–40 of 102 posts
Re: Ireland fast tracks Bill to criminalise harmful voice or image misuse
#32"Ireland fast tracks Bill to criminalise harmful voice or image misuse" - now that's some strange capitalis/zation in that headline. I'm Ok with title case, but randomly capitalising just one word in a title looks strange. Or is this something specifically Irish?
I suppose Bill is going to have a busy schedule in the following days.
Re: Ireland fast tracks Bill to criminalise harmful voice or image misuse
#33Ireland is just a copy of the UK, except it's a tax haven and a trojan horse of the EU. They have the same age requirement regulation online as the UK.
Re: Ireland fast tracks Bill to criminalise harmful voice or image misuse
#34What is the succinct definition of "harmful"?
A tort
Re: Ireland fast tracks Bill to criminalise harmful voice or image misuse
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
> A newspaper publishing the name/image of a suspected criminal is definitely "publishing an individuals name, photograph", without their consent, and can quite clearly cause alarm or distress. Cherrypicking your example: Newspapers shouldn’t publish names or images of suspects, so to me this specific example would be a very good thing. Not sure (IANAL) but I think in my country this is illegal already Otherwise I ag…
> Cherrypicking your example: Newspapers shouldn’t publish names or images of suspects, so to me this specific example would be a very good thing. Not sure (IANAL) but I think in my country this is illegal already Why shouldn't they? Why shouldn't the government have to publicize the names and identities of people they arrest so we know they're not doing so illegitimately?
Who's talking about governments? The post you responded to sure never brought it up.
Re: Ireland fast tracks Bill to criminalise harmful voice or image misuse
#36This is a good way to regulate this. Criminalize people who abuse AI tools to cause harm. Don't try to impose censorship or mass-surveillance on AI tools. I oppose all pornography, but censoring nudity from a model both compromises the model's quality (example: SD3) and stops legitimate artistic value. Though the framing on Grok is highly duplicitous. It is against the ToS, and it's about a few abusers among millions…
who decides what is harmful? That's going to be like letting a Bible thumping Moral Majority zealot decide what's Art and what's pornography.
The courts. Just like if you sue someone for anything else. Demonstrating harm is part of the process.
Re: Ireland fast tracks Bill to criminalise harmful voice or image misuse
#37> knowingly uses or infringes upon the use of and publishes ... an individual’s name, photograph ... without the individual’s prior consent ... and being reckless as to whether or not harm is caused to, the other person. > [harm occurs when someone] seriously interferes with the other person’s peace and privacy or causes alarm or distress to the other person This seems very widely worded. A newspaper publishing the n…
Your snipping is making it look broader than it is: you can’t misrepresent someone as being supportive of your product or cause, and you can’t distribute software that makes, or make yourself, likenesses of other people without their prior consent. It doesn’t constrain what you do in contexts other than where you use someone’s likeness to misrepresent their position. The harms are restricted to the scope above.
[deleted]
Re: Ireland fast tracks Bill to criminalise harmful voice or image misuse
#38Ireland is just a copy of the UK, except it's a tax haven and a trojan horse of the EU. They have the same age requirement regulation online as the UK.
Nonsense.
• There is ongoing discussion in the Irish parliament and policy circles about setting a digital age of consent or minimum age (e.g. 16) for social media access. This debate is driven by concern over youth wellbeing, although no formal law has yet been enacted.
Re: Ireland fast tracks Bill to criminalise harmful voice or image misuse
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
who decides what is harmful? That's going to be like letting a Bible thumping Moral Majority zealot decide what's Art and what's pornography.
And under which jurisdiction is this going to be prosecuted? So some random Nazi on Twitter makes CSAM of an Irish actress - is Musk going to comply with the subpoena to help the Irish authorities find the user? He’s already said he won’t be punishing users for ‘free speech’ as he defines it.. so then what?
The images would be published by Grok, which is part of Twitter. They are responsible for what they themselves publish. Hence Twitter is the obvious choice of where to direct the subpoena.
Re: Ireland fast tracks Bill to criminalise harmful voice or image misuse
#40This is a good way to regulate this. Criminalize people who abuse AI tools to cause harm. Don't try to impose censorship or mass-surveillance on AI tools. I oppose all pornography, but censoring nudity from a model both compromises the model's quality (example: SD3) and stops legitimate artistic value. Though the framing on Grok is highly duplicitous. It is against the ToS, and it's about a few abusers among millions…
who decides what is harmful? That's going to be like letting a Bible thumping Moral Majority zealot decide what's Art and what's pornography.
Who defines what a crime is anyways right?