A mother and daughter are advocating for better protections for victims after AI-generated nude images of the teen and others were circulating.

A mother and her 14-year-old daughter are advocating for better protections for victims after AI-generated nude images of the teen and other female classmates were circulated at a high school in New Jersey.

Meanwhile, on the other side of the country, officials are investigating an incident involving a teenage boy who allegedly used artificial intelligence to create and distribute similar images of other students – also teen girls - that attend a high school in suburban Seattle, Washington.

The disturbing cases have put a spotlight yet again on explicit AI-generated material that overwhelmingly harms women and children and is booming online at an unprecedented rate. According to an analysis by independent researcher Genevieve Oh that was shared with The Associated Press, more than 143,000 new deepfake videos were posted online this year, which surpasses every other year combined.

  • rchive@lemm.ee
    2·
    11 months ago

    If you make a picture today of someone based on how they looked 10 years ago, we say it’s depicting that person as the age they were 10 years ago. How is what age they are today relevant?

    • GeneralVincent@lemmy.worldEnglish
      5·
      11 months ago

      I’m unsure of the point you’re trying to make?

      It’s relevant in this case because the age they are today is underage. A picture of them 10 years ago is underage. And a picture of anyone made by AI to deep fake them nude is unethical irregardless of age. But it’s especially concerning when the goal is to depict underage girls as nude. The age thing specifically could get a little complicated in certain situations ig, but the intent is obvious most of the time.

      • rchive@lemm.ee
        1·
        11 months ago

        I’m obviously not advocating or defending any particular behavior.

        Legally speaking, why is what age they are today relevant rather than the age they are depicted as in the picture? Like, imagine we have a picture 20 years from now of someone at age 37. It’s legally fine until it’s revealed it was generated in 2023 when the person in question was 17? If the exact same picture was generated a year later it’s fine again?

        • DogMuffins@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
          2·
          11 months ago

          Basically, yes.

          Is the person under-age at the time the image was generated? and … Is the image sexual in nature?

          If yes, then generating or possessing such an image ought to be a crime.