6 ms·

It's literally just sticking the MPs name into an AI and asking for it to generate a mock ID for them. None of their real data is being used (e.g. their face, t

by timje1 1y ago

It's literally just sticking the MPs name into an AI and asking for it to generate a mock ID for them. None of their real data is being used (e.g. their face, their DoB, the address) and the mock IDs wouldn't fool anyone for a second. I'd love if someone who understands the law would weigh in though

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
John7878781 1y ago
It's better to be safe than sorry. For your own best interest, I would shut down the site and delete this post.
- brookst 1y ago
  “Don’t upset the autocrats!”
  - arrowsmith 1y ago
    You kid, but that's very good advice in most human societies at most points in history.
  - subscribed 1y ago
    You jest, but a barrister was threatened with arrest while holding a blank piece of paper on the protest: https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/barrister-threatened-with-arrest-says-we-must-allow-peaceful-protest-against-monarchy_uk_63202c37e4b000d988544c4c https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/barrister-threatened-...
    - brookst 1y ago
      I wasn’t jesting. I was (too) obliquely saying that when we all hasten to accede to the autocrats before they even ask, we become complicit in huge social evils. I’m not suggesting that everyone most do self-immolation, but if it were me, I would draw the line at being afraid of being “caught” for an obvious prank using no PII. Screw that, come arrest me if things have really gotten that bad.
      - subscribed 1y ago
        Thank you, I didn't get it previously. I completely agree.
- jrockway 1y ago
  Comply in advance. It's the #1 way to make illegal laws work!
NicuCalcea 1y ago
I don't think "It was actually ChatGPT that committed the crime, not me" would fly in a British court.
- marcus_holmes 1y ago
  That's an interesting question, though. We hold that LLMs are incapable of generating copyrighted images, so it's not just a tool - if it was just a tool then the author would be able to copyright the images. The courts recognise that an LLM is capable of generating things in its own right (which is why they're not copyrightable - copyrights only protect human works). So it follows that an LLM must be able to create images itself, separate from the human prompter. Whether that's enough to absolve the human of the crime, though - IANAL, and I suspect it would take the House of Lords to rule on it definitively.
  - antonvs 1y ago
    You're overthinking it. You're building on your own definition of what a tool is, but courts are likely to find that a person who used an AI with a specific type of prompt were using it as a tool and are responsible for the clearly stated intent behind their use. Whether that's actually legal in this case I don't know, but I'm pretty sure courts won't conclude "welp, it was the AI, not the user" in a case like this.
    - marcus_holmes 1y ago
      Yeah, probably you're right. Though it is an interesting thing to overthink - we have decided that LLMs are not tools for copyright but are tools for accountability. At some point they'll get smart enough to be accountable, and what happens then?
gus_massa 1y ago
Does the AI has access to newspapers? If John Doe is a MP, then he is probably the most famous Joe Doe in the last 5 years and the AI may grab his photo from a newspaper. I don't know about the national ID in UK, but here in Argentina the national ID number is public. A lot of public documents include "John Doe (DNI 23.456.789)", and the are sites where you can search it (the DB has problems with almost coalitions, so you may get a number 23.456.789 from one "John X. Doe" that is a 50yo in Buenos Aires and another "John Y. Doe" with number 59.876.653 that is a 3yo in Ushuaia, so in many cases it's easy to guess)
- dotancohen 1y ago
  ^coalitions^collisions
- OJFord 1y ago
  > I don't know about the national ID in UK There isn't one.
zmmmmm 1y ago
the law is pretty fickle that way. It's illegal to rob a bank no matter how badly you bungle it. Saying afterwards "but my gun was clearly made of plastic" probably won't get you completely off the hook if you actually threatened someone with it and asked for money (this site is literally titled Use Your Local MP's ID - it's expressing an intent).
aembleton 1y ago
It does use their face

by timje1 1y ago

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

John7878781 1y ago

It's better to be safe than sorry. For your own best interest, I would shut down the site and delete this post.

brookst 1y ago
“Don’t upset the autocrats!”
- arrowsmith 1y ago
  You kid, but that's very good advice in most human societies at most points in history.
- subscribed 1y ago
  You jest, but a barrister was threatened with arrest while holding a blank piece of paper on the protest: https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/barrister-threatened-with-arrest-says-we-must-allow-peaceful-protest-against-monarchy_uk_63202c37e4b000d988544c4c https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/barrister-threatened-...
  - brookst 1y ago
    I wasn’t jesting. I was (too) obliquely saying that when we all hasten to accede to the autocrats before they even ask, we become complicit in huge social evils. I’m not suggesting that everyone most do self-immolation, but if it were me, I would draw the line at being afraid of being “caught” for an obvious prank using no PII. Screw that, come arrest me if things have really gotten that bad.
    - subscribed 1y ago
      Thank you, I didn't get it previously. I completely agree.
jrockway 1y ago
Comply in advance. It's the #1 way to make illegal laws work!

NicuCalcea 1y ago

I don't think "It was actually ChatGPT that committed the crime, not me" would fly in a British court.

marcus_holmes 1y ago
That's an interesting question, though. We hold that LLMs are incapable of generating copyrighted images, so it's not just a tool - if it was just a tool then the author would be able to copyright the images. The courts recognise that an LLM is capable of generating things in its own right (which is why they're not copyrightable - copyrights only protect human works). So it follows that an LLM must be able to create images itself, separate from the human prompter. Whether that's enough to absolve the human of the crime, though - IANAL, and I suspect it would take the House of Lords to rule on it definitively.
- antonvs 1y ago
  You're overthinking it. You're building on your own definition of what a tool is, but courts are likely to find that a person who used an AI with a specific type of prompt were using it as a tool and are responsible for the clearly stated intent behind their use. Whether that's actually legal in this case I don't know, but I'm pretty sure courts won't conclude "welp, it was the AI, not the user" in a case like this.
  - marcus_holmes 1y ago
    Yeah, probably you're right. Though it is an interesting thing to overthink - we have decided that LLMs are not tools for copyright but are tools for accountability. At some point they'll get smart enough to be accountable, and what happens then?

gus_massa 1y ago

Does the AI has access to newspapers? If John Doe is a MP, then he is probably the most famous Joe Doe in the last 5 years and the AI may grab his photo from a newspaper. I don't know about the national ID in UK, but here in Argentina the national ID number is public. A lot of public documents include "John Doe (DNI 23.456.789)", and the are sites where you can search it (the DB has problems with almost coalitions, so you may get a number 23.456.789 from one "John X. Doe" that is a 50yo in Buenos Aires and another "John Y. Doe" with number 59.876.653 that is a 3yo in Ushuaia, so in many cases it's easy to guess)

dotancohen 1y ago
^coalitions^collisions
OJFord 1y ago
> I don't know about the national ID in UK There isn't one.

zmmmmm 1y ago

the law is pretty fickle that way. It's illegal to rob a bank no matter how badly you bungle it. Saying afterwards "but my gun was clearly made of plastic" probably won't get you completely off the hook if you actually threatened someone with it and asked for money (this site is literally titled Use Your Local MP's ID - it's expressing an intent).

aembleton 1y ago

It does use their face