interestingasfuck

i thought that was already copyright law? isn't that why you can't photograph people without model release forms?

I don't get it. Deep fakes were still ilegal as it's an attempt against honor and fabricated defamation. Training would still fall under "fair use" as any other copyright media. What's changed?

Until techs put waivers in the EULAs...

I for one would like much less copyright law; it really hasn't been good to me.

I admittedly don't understand how it has some how become easy for people, especially young people, to utilize this stuff. You can do image generation with a sufficiently strong GPU. But training requires power and VRAM.

As far as I can tell it's also limited to nVidia (except it appears all the image stuff for AMD works on Linux?) so it's expensive, you have to do so many things to set up simple image generation, and I imagine training for particular people (or anything) has to be harder to set up.

Otherwise deepfakes are just doing what Photoshop always did? Arguably Photoshop was a cheaper and easier method of creating them.

I have this feeling that generative AI is being used to normalize the idea of weaponizing it. "It took people's jobs! It made people naked and created libelous things!" Or as a means to crack down on hardware used for... Video games?

I could just be insane, but it always seems like when something seems bad, something worse is behind it.

Feel like this more than just deepfakes toox would it apply to assholes recording you in public without the person’s consent?