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

71–80 of 410 posts

Re: Stop developing this technology

#71

Post by tgv »

jolmg wrote: post #15
jakelazaroff wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can we agree that “someone would have done this anyway” is a poor justification for one’s actions? That’s what you say when you 1) recognize that you did a bad thing, but 2) don’t want to be blamed for it.

Can we agree that it's fundamentally not a bad thing to develop a technology? If you were a legislator, how would you like to criminalize the development of technology? You know, the most difficult part of this tech is probably the facial tracking, which is probably also used for the animation of 3d avatars. The jump is probably not huge.

No, we can't. Developing "tech" is an action bound by morals like any other action. Cigarette production has tech in it. They don't just grow on trees. It was developed, and keeps being developed, by people well aware of the effects of smoking.

Re: Stop developing this technology

#72

Post by baal80spam »

Technology isn't inherently good or evil, it's neutral.

If Company A / Country A / Person A won't do it, then Company B / Country B / Person B will do it and use it to bankrupt you / attack and possibly kill you / take advantage of you.

It's that simple.

Re: Stop developing this technology

#73

Post by blooalien »

sneak wrote: post #68
MattRix wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many things can be unethical/immoral without being illegal, and of course there are some technologies that are fundamentally bad.

What technologies are fundamentally bad? I don't know of any outside of perhaps torture devices.

Every single "weapon of mass destruction" is fundamentally bad technology, just for one ultra-easy answer…

Re: Stop developing this technology

#74

Post by Havoc »

baal80spam wrote: post #72

Technology isn't inherently good or evil, it's neutral. If Company A / Country A / Person A won't do it, then Company B / Country B / Person B will do it and use it to bankrupt you / attack and possibly kill you / take advantage of you. It's that simple.

>Technology isn't inherently good or evil, it's neutral.

Broadly yes, but this severe simplification glosses over the some technologies having more potential for abuse than others.

A machine gun has more potential for evil than a dessert spoon.

Re: Stop developing this technology

#75

Post by tgv »

Remember: if you helped develop it, you're responsible for it. If it kills people, you share the blame.

So, what's the possible scenario for that outcome? Well, look at the upcoming elections in Nigeria. The BBC writes: "With an estimated 80 million Nigerians online, social media plays a huge role in national debates about politics. Our investigation uncovered different tactics used to reach more people on Twitter. Many play on divisive issues such as religious, ethnic and regional differences." ABC News writes: "At least 800 people died in post-election violence after the 2011 polls."

Adding deepfakes into this mix can trigger violent reactions. Should that happen, the creators of deepfakes are obviously to blame, but also those who enabled them, and that includes the original researchers, are responsible. Ignoring that is just putting your head in the sand.

Re: Stop developing this technology

#76

Post by actionfromafar »

sneak wrote: post #67
cwillu wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the main page: “Communication groups [...] • mrdeepfakes - the biggest NSFW English deepfake community”, which strains my assumption of good faith debate regarding their ethics.

Nothing about producing or consuming deepfakes suggests bad faith. You might not like the art, but deepfakes are not harmful.

This is a shallow take, no matter which way you look at it. "Guns don't kill people."

Re: Stop developing this technology

#77

Post by lovemenot »

jolmg wrote: post #61
prox wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s simply that it’s a kids/teen level argument. “But they did it too!” Not a lot of thought went into it, is what it usually tells me.

The argument wasn't "Doing something bad is fine because others are", it's "You're trying to stop a bad thing happening by stopping some people upstream from doing something that's perfectly fine. That's going to be ineffective." But you're right about me not putting a lot of thought. I didn't think this would need more arguing than that. I still believe that tech is fundamentally neutral, and as such so is its devel…

There are others - not you - who will justify their own actions thusly: the technology existed, its better that the good guys (me - of course) should use it before the bad guys do.

In the space between both equivocations (yours and the other guy's), lies the potential for moral abuse.

Re: Stop developing this technology

#78

Post by kyleyeats »

tgv wrote: post #75

Remember: if you helped develop it, you're responsible for it. If it kills people, you share the blame. So, what's the possible scenario for that outcome? Well, look at the upcoming elections in Nigeria. The BBC writes: "With an estimated 80 million Nigerians online, social media plays a huge role in national debates about politics. Our investigation uncovered different tactics used to reach more people on Twitter. M…

This reply to your comment could only exist because you posted your comment. Are you responsible for anything I say in this box? You enabled it!

Re: Stop developing this technology

#79

Post by Buffout »

prox wrote: post #20
jakelazaroff wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can we agree that “someone would have done this anyway” is a poor justification for one’s actions? That’s what you say when you 1) recognize that you did a bad thing, but 2) don’t want to be blamed for it.

It’s simply that it’s a kids/teen level argument. “But they did it too!” Not a lot of thought went into it, is what it usually tells me.

This "kid level" argument fooled even Albert Einstein, Roosevelt, and many others. into developing atomic bomb. "If we don't build it Nazis will"

Using it was achieved by different kid level argument "It will prevent even more death and suffering"

Re: Stop developing this technology

#80

Post by caporaltito »

YurgenJurgensen wrote: post #63
caporaltito wrote: post #51

This reminds of the whole crowd of artists calling for a ban of AI generated art because "it's stealing". The change will happen, whether you want it or not. So those guys'd better raise the prices for their unique, by-hand manufactured, hard worked pieces of work and leave the low-quality, generic and industrially generated ones to AI. Embrace the change, as they say.

Do you carry a gas mask with you wherever you go? Mustard gas is over a hundred years old, and change will happen, whether you want it or not, so you should be able to just go down to the supermarket and buy it. I'm personally very annoyed by random mustard gas attacks, but there's just no mechanism in society for preventing them.

Your analogy is 100% on point, I guess?
Post reply on HN