this post was submitted on 26 Jan 2024
290 points (87.4% liked)
Technology
58303 readers
10 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I'm not really sure what to think of this. On one hand, the way I see it, AI deep fakes are essentially a form of defamation, and can harm people by in a way being a false rumour about their sexual life. However, public figures are subject to a much higher standard for defamation, and for a very good reason, else there would be a strong chilling effect on satire, parody, and criticism.
In general I think that deepfakes are only wrong (defamatory) if a reasonable person couldn't easily distinguish them from reality, so obvious fake stuff doesn't count. But for those that are, where is the line drawn for public figures? It is unfortunate that many people can't choose whether to become a public figure, but it is essential to a functional society that freedom of the press and free expression be lenient when it comes to satirical, critical, creative, and even indecent works related to them. But this is of course not absolute.