• themeatbridge@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    41
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    8 months ago

    No reason not to ban them entirely.

    The problem is enforcing the ban. 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? It would be trivial to host a site in a country without legal protections and make the software available from anywhere.

    • 520@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      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

      • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        Right, this is my point. The toothpaste is out of the tube. So would simply having the software capable of making deepfake porn be a crime?

      • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        Perhaps an unpopular opinion, but I’d be fine with that. I have yet to see a benefit or possible benefit that outweighs the costs.

        • 520@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months 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.

    • Howdy@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      8 months ago

      I feel like a sensible realistic course of action with this is it needs to be in the act of sharing/distributing. It would be way to broad otherwise as the tools that generate this stuff have unlimited purposes. Obvious child situations should be dealt with in the act of production of but the enforcement mechanism needs to be on the sharing/distribution part. Unfortunately analogy is blame the person not the tool on this one.

      • catloaf@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        8 months ago

        Right. And honestly, this should already be covered under existing harassment laws.

      • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        8 months ago

        Yeah, I feel like if you find this shit on someone’s computer, whether they shared it or not, there should be some consequences. Court-mandated counseling at a minimum.