>It's kind of a testament to our times that the person who chooses to look at synthetic porn instead of supporting a real-life human trafficking industry is the bad actor.
"Bad actor" is a pretty vague term, I think they are using it as a catch all without diving into the specifics. we are all projecting what that may mean based on our own awareness of this topic as a result.
I totally agree with your assessment and honestly would love to see this tech create less of a demand for the product human-traffickers produce.
Celebrity deep fakes and racist images made by internet trolls are a few of the overt things they are willing to acknowledge is a problem, and they are fighting against (Google Gemini's over correction on this has been the talk this week). Does it put pressure on the companies to change for PR reasons, yes. It also gives a little bit of a Streisand effect, so it may be a zero sum game.
We aren't talking about the big issue surrounding this tech, the issue that would cause far more damage to their brand than celebrity deep fakes:
"Bad actor" is a pretty vague term, I think they are using it as a catch all without diving into the specifics. we are all projecting what that may mean based on our own awareness of this topic as a result.
I totally agree with your assessment and honestly would love to see this tech create less of a demand for the product human-traffickers produce.
Celebrity deep fakes and racist images made by internet trolls are a few of the overt things they are willing to acknowledge is a problem, and they are fighting against (Google Gemini's over correction on this has been the talk this week). Does it put pressure on the companies to change for PR reasons, yes. It also gives a little bit of a Streisand effect, so it may be a zero sum game.
We aren't talking about the big issue surrounding this tech, the issue that would cause far more damage to their brand than celebrity deep fakes:
Pedophilic image generation.
Guard rails should be miles high for this one.