520

joined 2 years ago
[–] 520@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The problem is the cat's out of the bag.

Open source image generators already exist and have been widely disseminated worldwide.

So all you'd end up doing is putting up a roadblock for legitimate uses. Anybody using it to cause harm will not be seriously impeded. They can just pick up the software from a Russian/Chinese/EU host or less official distribution methods.

It would be as effective as the US trying to outlaw the exporting of strong encryption standards in the 90s. That is to say, completely ineffective and actually harmful. Enemies of the US were still using strong encryption anyway.

[–] 520@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago

It's been in the cooking pot for a while. It just took a while to come to fruition

[–] 520@kbin.social 13 points 1 year ago

Violence. It means violence.

[–] 520@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

Yes, I would argue it was. Not quite as brazenly but yes.

[–] 520@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

Except this ban is doing the exact opposite. It's only affecting US citizens. Foreigners are not affected

[–] 520@kbin.social 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

It always has, at least from US government. Have you not read the constitution?

[–] 520@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Is Lemmy using a predatory algorithm designed to enrich itself at the expense of the well being of its users and utilize its platform to influence US policy against its own interests?

You mean like Facebook? Which isn't being banned?

[–] 520@kbin.social 21 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Would it be a crime to have access to the software, or would they need to catch the criminals with the images and video files?

Problem with the former is that would outlaw any self hosted image generator. Any image generator is capable of use for deep fake porn

[–] 520@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago (10 children)

You joke but this has a chilling effect on all sm platforms based outside of the US. They just took a massive shit on the 1st amendment.

[–] 520@kbin.social 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Yeah, it would in theory be great.

The problem is, Tesla's tech simply doesn't work for this, despite Elon's insistence otherwise.

[–] 520@kbin.social 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

You would have to be a Muslim. Not drinking and smoking is usually something that they like to promote in their citizenry.

Not that they aren't shitty towards Atheists, but it's a whole 'nother level with the Uyghurs. Think post-9/11 islamaphobia taken to wild, CCP level extremes, and you're not far off the level they take it and their 'rationale' for doing so. (Basically there were a few terrorist attacks years back and the CCP has been milking it as an excuse for their conduct)

[–] 520@kbin.social 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

As someone very hesitant about AI I'm comfortable with it. It's a streaming service, not my email inbox.

view more: ‹ prev next ›