7 ms·

Whatever you think about X's image generation models, I don't see how it is related to the petition that the EFF is opposing. Is generation of non-consensual i

Whatever you think about X's image generation models, I don't see how it is related to the petition that the EFF is opposing. Is generation of non-consensual imagery really a privacy issue? If someone publishes a real naked photo of you, that was acquired without your consent, that would be a privacy issue. If someone generates a naked photo of you, even if it looks identical to a real photo, it's not your private data.

righthand 3mo ago
Is it private data if it was scraped from my social media profile marked private but leaked through a shared party? My expectation was that image would only be shared with those I wanted to see it (form of privacy).
- WatchDog 3mo ago
  That's fair. Is there any indication as to if xAi trains on private profiles?
  - righthand 3mo ago
    Is there any indication it doesn’t. From what you know about LLM teams, products, and engineers, especially XAI, does the word “private” or “Disallow: <my-private-profile-path>” seem to stop them?
dualvariable 3mo ago
In an ideal world, generated non-consensual imagery should be illegal through invasion of privacy through misappropriation of name or likeness, but I think only a limited number of states have those laws.
- neuroticnews25 3mo ago
  Should it apply also to drawings? Detailed descriptions? Strong mental visualisations?
- numpad0 2mo ago
  In an ideal world, defamation should not be illegal through invasion of specifically privacy. Because that shields perpetrators from clean-room defamations, which is wrong. I guess I live in such an ideal world? Defamation don't require proofs of breach of privacy where I am, only damages. I've heard that this setup is not universal.
numpad0 3mo ago
"CSAM" is a codeword for anime. Users of this term routinely reject focusing on real kids and abuses. I assume "privacy" must be therefore a codeword too, especially considering that nonconsensual shocking images can be handled by defamation laws than privacy laws and principles.
- kg 3mo ago
  I would hope we can agree that aggressive policing of anime and cartoons is a bad thing without denying the real existence of CSAM - the actual thing - or denying the bad things that have to occur for it to exist
  - numpad0 3mo ago
    I never denied the real existence of CSAM, I'm just saying that there are people who use "CSAM" to specifically mean anime and anime related photos and avoids discussion of actually detecting or preventing sexual abuses. I think I've seen it blatantly said on organizational blog posts somewhere that trying to move focus to kids is disingenuous or something.
    - meheleventyone 3mo ago
      Just so were clear here the CSAM acronym stands for Child Sexual Abuse Material. Some Anime gets caught up because there is a lot of dubious visual depictions of that.
      - camgunz 3mo ago
        Which is a moral affront, not an offense against a person. The whole reason CSAM is abhorrent is its evidence of abuse. A cartoon is evidence of nothing. We should treat them differently.
        deleted 3mo ago
        [deleted]
        3mo ago
totetsu 3mo ago
I think the terminology here can confuse the issue a bit. And because its such a socially pernicious and stigmatized topic, it's hard to even talk about the phrasing without without raising doubts as to why you would get caught up in the weeds on such an issue. But, I would say there is use in making the distinction between something that is CSAM, where its a record of abuse that has happened to a real child, and sexualized depictions of children, or content promoting the sexualization of children. The social and personal harms are distinct, and if we are to firmly understand the arguments for/against guardrails on generative AI, then it's a distinction that needs to be made I think.
- kg 3mo ago
  A problem you'd probably run into here is that it would be rather difficult to prove that no real CSAM was involved in the process of making the somehow-okay fake CSAM. Image generation models require training sets, after all. Do the companies training these models have the necessary data and evidence to prove every individual in every training image was over 18? Is generating fake CSAM okay if you trained the model on non-CSAM photos of real kids? I don't think so. There are of course situations where being aggressive about this can hinder people's freedoms - like an adult who looks 'too young' having their freedoms curtailed because any photos or videos would Look Like CSAM - but I don't think they're common enough harms to justify holding back on regulation here.
  - numpad0 3mo ago
    > like an adult who looks 'too young' having their freedoms curtailed because any photos or videos would Look Like CSAM - but I don't think they're common enough harms It is extremely common in some parts of the world. Age from visual appearance basically doesn't work inter-culturally, with or without AI, and ... there are people amassing something like 1/3 of the world that look like kids until they must retire from all work including use of gas stoves to boil water. Said people just literally look like kids, attracts wrong kinds of the rest 2/3, wrongly reject them if others come over, and gets banned on social media as being underaged, all the time. edit: I have feeling that the concept of "adults by appearance" might be the case of suspicious discontinuities created by industrial revolution; it is often said that the modern concept of binary child/adults dichotomy is the result of industrialization though the concept of child always existed. For this reason, there might have been selective pressure towards attaining "definitely adult" appearances at younger ages in forerunner regions, and less such pressure at regions that followed it. IMO that makes more sense than assuming people from some regions are obsessed with certain things.
deleted 3mo ago
[deleted]
xracy 3mo ago
> If someone generates a naked photo of you, even if it looks identical to a real photo, it's not your private data. "You see, your honor, it's not a picture of them, it's a picture of their reflection in the mirror." I feel like this discussion is a question of what the exact structure of the hydrogen-filled blimp should look like, and not a discussion of the fact that THE BLIMP IS FILLED WITH HYDROGEN. Like we got so deep into the lawyered-definition of words, that we skipped right over the clearly wrong/awful intent.
- chrisjj 3mo ago
  > Like we got so deep into the lawyered-definition of words, Perhaps try reading "your private data" again - slowly.
  - xracy 3mo ago
    What do you think my comment was responding to? Literally those are the words that I was responding to. Saying that the provenance of a naked image of myself is relevant to the fact that it's a naked image of _me_ and I don't have ownership over my own image is exactly the kind of lawyer-brained wording I was referring to when I made the comment about the mirror. "It's not a picture of you, it's a picture of a reflection of you."
    - chrisjj 3mo ago
      > What do you think my comment was responding to? Your misunderstanding of "private data". This is not lawyered words. > Saying that the provenance of a naked image of myself It is not a naked image of yourself. An image of someone else's naked body does not become a reflection of an image of you just because your face is pasted on it. Object if you wish, but when it comes to privacy, the only possible breach is of the privacy of the body, not the face. > is relevant to the fact that it's a naked image of _me_ and I don't have ownership over my own image It is not your image.
      - shakna 3mo ago

righthand 3mo ago

Is it private data if it was scraped from my social media profile marked private but leaked through a shared party? My expectation was that image would only be shared with those I wanted to see it (form of privacy).

WatchDog 3mo ago
That's fair. Is there any indication as to if xAi trains on private profiles?
- righthand 3mo ago
  Is there any indication it doesn’t. From what you know about LLM teams, products, and engineers, especially XAI, does the word “private” or “Disallow: <my-private-profile-path>” seem to stop them?

dualvariable 3mo ago

In an ideal world, generated non-consensual imagery should be illegal through invasion of privacy through misappropriation of name or likeness, but I think only a limited number of states have those laws.

neuroticnews25 3mo ago
Should it apply also to drawings? Detailed descriptions? Strong mental visualisations?
numpad0 2mo ago
In an ideal world, defamation should not be illegal through invasion of specifically privacy. Because that shields perpetrators from clean-room defamations, which is wrong. I guess I live in such an ideal world? Defamation don't require proofs of breach of privacy where I am, only damages. I've heard that this setup is not universal.

numpad0 3mo ago

"CSAM" is a codeword for anime. Users of this term routinely reject focusing on real kids and abuses. I assume "privacy" must be therefore a codeword too, especially considering that nonconsensual shocking images can be handled by defamation laws than privacy laws and principles.

kg 3mo ago
I would hope we can agree that aggressive policing of anime and cartoons is a bad thing without denying the real existence of CSAM - the actual thing - or denying the bad things that have to occur for it to exist
- numpad0 3mo ago
  I never denied the real existence of CSAM, I'm just saying that there are people who use "CSAM" to specifically mean anime and anime related photos and avoids discussion of actually detecting or preventing sexual abuses. I think I've seen it blatantly said on organizational blog posts somewhere that trying to move focus to kids is disingenuous or something.
  - meheleventyone 3mo ago
    Just so were clear here the CSAM acronym stands for Child Sexual Abuse Material. Some Anime gets caught up because there is a lot of dubious visual depictions of that.
    - camgunz 3mo ago
      Which is a moral affront, not an offense against a person. The whole reason CSAM is abhorrent is its evidence of abuse. A cartoon is evidence of nothing. We should treat them differently.
      - deleted 3mo ago
        [deleted]
      - 3mo ago

totetsu 3mo ago

I think the terminology here can confuse the issue a bit. And because its such a socially pernicious and stigmatized topic, it's hard to even talk about the phrasing without without raising doubts as to why you would get caught up in the weeds on such an issue. But, I would say there is use in making the distinction between something that is CSAM, where its a record of abuse that has happened to a real child, and sexualized depictions of children, or content promoting the sexualization of children. The social and personal harms are distinct, and if we are to firmly understand the arguments for/against guardrails on generative AI, then it's a distinction that needs to be made I think.

kg 3mo ago
A problem you'd probably run into here is that it would be rather difficult to prove that no real CSAM was involved in the process of making the somehow-okay fake CSAM. Image generation models require training sets, after all. Do the companies training these models have the necessary data and evidence to prove every individual in every training image was over 18? Is generating fake CSAM okay if you trained the model on non-CSAM photos of real kids? I don't think so. There are of course situations where being aggressive about this can hinder people's freedoms - like an adult who looks 'too young' having their freedoms curtailed because any photos or videos would Look Like CSAM - but I don't think they're common enough harms to justify holding back on regulation here.
- numpad0 3mo ago
  > like an adult who looks 'too young' having their freedoms curtailed because any photos or videos would Look Like CSAM - but I don't think they're common enough harms It is extremely common in some parts of the world. Age from visual appearance basically doesn't work inter-culturally, with or without AI, and ... there are people amassing something like 1/3 of the world that look like kids until they must retire from all work including use of gas stoves to boil water. Said people just literally look like kids, attracts wrong kinds of the rest 2/3, wrongly reject them if others come over, and gets banned on social media as being underaged, all the time. edit: I have feeling that the concept of "adults by appearance" might be the case of suspicious discontinuities created by industrial revolution; it is often said that the modern concept of binary child/adults dichotomy is the result of industrialization though the concept of child always existed. For this reason, there might have been selective pressure towards attaining "definitely adult" appearances at younger ages in forerunner regions, and less such pressure at regions that followed it. IMO that makes more sense than assuming people from some regions are obsessed with certain things.

deleted 3mo ago

[deleted]

xracy 3mo ago

> If someone generates a naked photo of you, even if it looks identical to a real photo, it's not your private data. "You see, your honor, it's not a picture of them, it's a picture of their reflection in the mirror." I feel like this discussion is a question of what the exact structure of the hydrogen-filled blimp should look like, and not a discussion of the fact that THE BLIMP IS FILLED WITH HYDROGEN. Like we got so deep into the lawyered-definition of words, that we skipped right over the clearly wrong/awful intent.

chrisjj 3mo ago
> Like we got so deep into the lawyered-definition of words, Perhaps try reading "your private data" again - slowly.
- xracy 3mo ago
  What do you think my comment was responding to? Literally those are the words that I was responding to. Saying that the provenance of a naked image of myself is relevant to the fact that it's a naked image of _me_ and I don't have ownership over my own image is exactly the kind of lawyer-brained wording I was referring to when I made the comment about the mirror. "It's not a picture of you, it's a picture of a reflection of you."
  - chrisjj 3mo ago
    > What do you think my comment was responding to? Your misunderstanding of "private data". This is not lawyered words. > Saying that the provenance of a naked image of myself It is not a naked image of yourself. An image of someone else's naked body does not become a reflection of an image of you just because your face is pasted on it. Object if you wish, but when it comes to privacy, the only possible breach is of the privacy of the body, not the face. > is relevant to the fact that it's a naked image of _me_ and I don't have ownership over my own image It is not your image.
    - shakna 3mo ago