[flagged]
Imagine some middle school kids. One of them scribbles a drawing and writes the name of a girl in their class above their stick figure drawing and a giant penis in their face, with the name of some boy above it. It gets passed around at school and people pick on her. Are we going to fault the drawing for this? Or are we going to fault parents, the school, culture, kids being assholes? Imagine some Mothers Against Tomfoolery group agitating for this to be punishable by felony convictions, most reasonable people would be wildly against it. Now, because we have computers instead of pencils all of a sudden this panty wringing has momentum? It is a moral panic, just like every one that came before, and it is dangerous just like every one that came before.
Google teen suicide nudes and then come back and tell me it's just a moral panic
You assume it's a moral panic because some people don't behave in ways you deem rational and don' share your views on sex.
Guess what, we're not Vulcans. We're humans with feelings and violations like this can have serious consequences for the people it's done to
First, teens take nudes of themselves to send to each other because they're horny. When those nudes get leaked, it's betrayal by someone they trust, it's actually a picture of them that they took, and it is harassment. Now, killing yourself in response to it, that in my mind is an indicator of an unhealthy environment at school. But that's still a real violation of their trust, it's real harassment, it is understandable that they'd feel extreme stress as a result. We are talking about drawings, not some mirror selfie some girl sent to her boyfriend that he showed his friends. The two scenarios are not the same thing.
People behaving in ways that aren't rational is a core part of a moral panic. I don't care if people share my views on sex. Moral panics to make homosexuality illegal had different views of sexuality also. Just because someone has a different view than me doesn't give them the right to pass laws that affect everybody. We ideally determine what should be illegal based on what's reasonable, not based on how people feel. It is unreasonable to throw people in jail for technologically modern doodles.
No felony convictions .. and a half decent chance some of the kids he passed it to that passed it on giggling get the same deal, yard duty.
After all, we've gotten used to a million things as a society that Puritans said would ruin us and destroy the fabric of our lives, our families, our relationships, etc etc.
I'm sure it's pretty shitty to have nudes of you passed around at school, but the fact remains that this tech isn't going away, and it does seem rather likely that being able to create nudes/pornos of anyone trivially will eventually diminish the impact of them to the point of near insignificance.
If you know you can just type in "getnudes.io" or something and upload a couple pictures and get a full-blown porno of someone in seconds, then there's going to be pornos of everyone that anyone is interested in. To misquote The Incredibles, if everyone is nude, nobody is.
Yours is probably the most practical response. The technology isn't going away, and in all likelihood it is going to get more and more refined and better, faster than we think.
It's conceivable that in 5-10 years, there will exist software that anyone can run on a commodity PC or phone, that produces high-definition media of any target person doing or saying anything that the software user can dream up. The technology isn't just going to disappear. So it's up to society to figure out how it is going to deal with that reality.
Asking me what I would think if someone produced an AI nude porno of me or one of my family is irrelevant. If someone for wanted to make it, it would get made regardless of what anybody thought about it. So how do we respond?
Let's change the thought experiment, what if it wasn't some nameless girl, what if it was your mom, your sister or daughter - anyone who tells me they're completely comfortable with that is either weird or lying
The arguments being made here rest on discounting human emotions, requiring that they be justified rationally. That's not a fair or reasonable standard.
What would you call a guy who feels nothing about having his mother or daughters nude photos spread. You're telling me you take issue with characterizing that as weird and unusual?