Yeah, it certainly still feels icky, especially since a lot of those materials in all likelihood will still have ended up in the model without the original photo subjects knowing about it or consenting. But that's at least much better than having a model straight up trained on CSAM, and at least hypothetically, there is a way to make this process entirely "clean".
hikaru755
joined 1 year ago
There are legit, non-CSAM types of images that would still make these changes apparent, though. Not every picture of a naked child is CSAM. Family photos from the beach, photos in biology textbooks, even comic-style illustrated children's books will allow inferences about what real humans look like. So no, I don't think that an image generation model has to be trained on any CSAM in order to be able to produce convincing CSAM.
There's also this part:
But Johansson's public statement describes how they tried to shmooze her: they approached her last fall and were given the FO, contacted her agent two days before launch to ask for reconsideration, launched it before they got a response, then yanked it when her lawyers asked them how they made the voice.
Which is still not an admission of guilt, but seems very shady at the very least, if it's actually what happened.
I'm confused on how to read that hashtag. Anti-kings are losers? Anti-"kings are losers"?
Except discord is not an ads-based platform? I've never seen a third party ad on there
where anyone thinks it's ok or normal to recommend suicide to people
Except that's already happening even without it being normalized, there have always been assholes that are gonna tell people to kill themselves, especially if they've never seen the person they're talking to before. I don't see how this is any different.
Literally the whole thing would not have happened without the policy.
It also wouldn't have happened if a fucked up system wasn't withholding actual, reasonable alternatives that the person was clearly asking for. That's my point. Let's fix the actual problems, rather than try to silence the symptoms.
...and did you notice how everyone was outraged by that? That incident was not an issue with assisted suicide being available, that was an issue with fucked up systems withholding existing alternatives and a tone-deaf case worker (who is not a doctor) handling impersonal communications. Maybe it's also an issue with this kind of thing being able to be decided by a government worker instead of medical and psychological professionals. But definitely nothing about this would have been made better by assisted suicide not being generally available for people who legitimately want it, except the actual problem wouldn't have been put into the spotlight like this.
I don't want to create a future where, "I've tried everything I can to fix myself and I still feel like shit," is met with a polite and friendly, "Oh, well have you considered killing yourself?"
Are you for real? This kind of thing is a last resort that nobody is going to just outright suggest unprompted to a suffering person, unless that person asks for it themselves. No matter how "normalized" suicide might become, it's never gonna be something doctors will want to recommend. That's just... Why would you even think that's what's gonna happen
Maybe we should clarify what a slur is? Because to my knowledge, a slur is a term that has such negative connotations that it is considered offensive and discriminatory against a certain group of people in itself, without any additional context. You simply do not use it unless you want to insult or offend someone from that group. If a term is only offensive based on how it's used, it's just a regular insult, not a slur.
So, "can be used as a slur" is not a thing. A word is either a slur, or it isn't. Neither trans nor cis are slurs at the moment. I've never seen trans be used as an insult before. And even cis is almost never meant as a direct insult, merely as a reminder that someone is talking about things they have no lived experience with and should probably check their privilege. Yes, that can be in a demeaning way, but the goal there is not to hurt you, but to make you piss off. It's an act of self protection. Nobody is seeking cis people out and starting to call them names unless they insert themselves into trans spaces and start talking shit about trans issues. If you're doing that, and getting told off insults you or hurts your feelings, then, frankly, that's a you problem.
...yeah, it is. What are you implying?
The prefix cis- is Latin and means on this side of.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cisgender
Just as "trans-" means on the other side of. It's literally just the opposite of trans.
Ad blocker?