Credit where it’s due, and good on her for standing up against this, but it comes with a big asterisk.
Her political party claim they’re standing up for women while being responsible for actively reducing women’s pay.
They’re complaining about AI after using it to try and trick the public that they’re not racist. They say it should be regulated while currently trying to bring in legislation that will make it much harder to regulate AI.
She’s obviously right, but she’s also part of a group that’s contributing to these problems.
Wow, that must’ve taken guts.
Guts is an understatement. Credit where it’s due, for putting herself in the path of the proverbial lightning.
Most politicians would wait for someone else to be the victim, before waving their pics at the cameras. Not taken the harm/risk on themselves to preempt others getting hurt.
Ovaries*
Wild that there’s an AI-generated summary of the article before the article, on a story about the problems with AI. Also, is it that hard to ask your writers to write a summary of their own articles? Hasn’t writing tweets (or similar microblog posts) already allowed most writers to develop the skill of writing a concise, simplified version of a story? Why are we entrusting this to AI when a human will be able to more accurately summarize their own article, and include appropriate nuance.
Apologies for the mini crash-out that isn’t really related to the real story here. Thank you OP for sharing, and kudos to the MP for taking a stand.
This was not something I would’ve ever guessed would have happened anytime soon.
I suspect that AI regulation especially a hard crackdown on image generation is right around the corner after this move.
Article doesn’t load :(
People have been doing this without AI for a very long time, even before computers were a thing. All AI did was make it easy.
Genie is out of the bottle. All we can do now is make it illegal to possess or distribute, the same way we handle CSAM.
I am not saying this shouldn’t be illegal, as distributing it hurts the victim, but CSAM is proof that a child has been abused. I think those are two very different things.
There’s also AI generated CSAM now, and can be generated via prompt loopholes. Still fucking sick if you ask me…
Definitely fucking sick, but “fucking sick” is no way to run a society. The problem with child porn is that it can only be made by sexually abusing children, so without that factor you have to ask: Does AI generated child porn embolden or mollify pedophiles? Rigorous scientific research is necessary to produce an answer to that question, not kneejerk reactions.
AI generated anything relies on training data based on the real thing, so there’s no way to use a generator to “ethically” produce images of something unethical because it’s based on the unethical imagery. There’s no pathway out of the original abuse.
I would disagree. In the same vein as Nazi and imperial Japanese scientific experiments were poured over and used to further our understanding of human anatomy and the limits of the body as well as a host of other things. The original experiments were horrific to the extreme but it happened and simply destroying that data would help no one.
Those children have already been abused. That material already exists. Would it not make sense to use it to make a program that fulfills the desires of those who would do that sort of thing so that others do not need to be abused to produce it? It wouldn’t end it outright, but it seems like it would help.
Good thing the prime minister is a man and he is sorted
Credit where it’s due, but meanwhile her party leader is campaining against regulations and claiming anyone left of Hitler is bot
Not saying it’s ethical to do this, but AI can make gay porn too
Please say the AI part is the bad thing, not the gay part
