Instagram is profiting from several ads that invite people to create nonconsensual nude images with AI image generation apps, once again showing that some of the most harmful applications of AI tools are not hidden on the dark corners of the internet, but are actively promoted to users by social media companies unable or unwilling to enforce their policies about who can buy ads on their platforms.

While parent company Meta’s Ad Library, which archives ads on its platforms, who paid for them, and where and when they were posted, shows that the company has taken down several of these ads previously, many ads that explicitly invited users to create nudes and some ad buyers were up until I reached out to Meta for comment. Some of these ads were for the best known nonconsensual “undress” or “nudify” services on the internet.

  • MareOfNights@discuss.tchncs.de
    cake
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    37
    ·
    2 months ago

    Am I the only one who doesn’t care about this?

    Photoshop has existed for some time now, so creating fake nudes just became easier.

    Also why would you care if someone jerks off to a photo you uploaded, regardless of potential nude edits. They can also just imagine you naked.

    If you don’t want people to jerk off to your photos, don’t upload any. It happens with and without these apps.

    But Instagram selling apps for it is kinda fucked, since it’s very anti-porn, but then sells apps for it (to children).

    • YungOnions@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      42
      arrow-down
      13
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      It’s about consent. If you have no problem with people jerking off to your pictures, fine, but others do.

      If you don’t want people to jerk off to your photos, don’t upload any. It happens with and without these apps.

      You get that that opinion is pretty much the same as those who say if she didn’t want to be harrassed she shouldn’t have worn such provocative clothing!?

      How about we allow people to upload whatever pictures they want and try to address the weirdos turning them into porn without consent, rather than blaming the victims?

      • CaptainEffort@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        If you have no problem with people jerking off to your pictures, fine, but others do

        Of course, but people have been doing this since the dawn of time. So unless the plan is to incorporate the Thought Police, there’s no way to actually stop it from happening.

        • YungOnions@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          Maybe, but we can certainly help by, amongst many other things, not advertising AI Nude Apps on Instagram. Ultimately what we shouldn’t be doing is blaming the victims by implying they are somehow at fault for having the audacity to upload pictures of themselves to the Internet.

          • CaptainEffort@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            I agree completely with the last part of your comment at least, that other comment unironically saying that it’s the women’s fault for dressing the way they do is bizarre and archaic.

      • MareOfNights@discuss.tchncs.de
        cake
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        23
        ·
        2 months ago

        Nah it’s more like: If she didn’t want people to jerk off thinking about her, she shouldn’t have worn such provocative clothing.

        I honestly don’t think we should encourage uploading this many photos as private people, but that’s something else.

        You don’t need consent to jerk off to someone’s photos. You do need consent to tell them about it. Creating images is a bit riskier, but if you make sure no one ever sees them, there is no actual harm done.

    • Cris@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      2 months ago

      I think it’s clear you have never experienced being sexualized when you weren’t okay with it. It’s a pretty upsetting experience that can feel pretty violating. And as most guys rarely if ever experience being sexualized, never mind when they don’t want to be, I’m not surprised people might be unable to emphasize

      Having experienced being sexualized when I wasn’t comfortable with it, this kind of thing makes me kinda sick to be honest. People are used to having a reasonable expectation that posting safe for work pictures online isn’t inviting being sexualized. And that it would almost never be turned into pornographic material featuring their likeness, whether it was previously possible with Photoshop or not.

      It’s not surprising people would find the loss of that reasonable assumption discomforting given how uncomfortable it is to be sexualized when you don’t want to be. How uncomfortable a thought it is that you can just be going about your life and minding your own business, and it will now be convenient and easy to produce realistic porn featuring your likeness, at will, with no need for uncommon skills not everyone has

      • MareOfNights@discuss.tchncs.de
        cake
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        19
        ·
        2 months ago

        Interesting (wrong) assumption there buddy.

        But why would I care how people think of me? If it influences their actions, we gonna start to have problems, tho.

        • Cris@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

          Fair enough, I’m sorry for making assumptions about you.

          I do think my points stand though

    • InternetPerson@lemmings.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      Also why would you care if someone jerks off to a photo you uploaded, regardless of potential nude edits. They can also just imagine you naked.

      Imagining and creating physical (even digial) material are different levels of how real and tangible it feels. Don’t you think?

      There is an active act of carefully editing those pictures involved. It’s a misuse and against your intention when you posted such a picture of yourself. You are loosing control by that and become unwillingly part of the sexual act of someone else.

      Sure, those, who feel violated by that, might also not like if people imagine things, but that’s still a less “real” level.

      For example: Imagining to murder someone is one thing. Creating very explicit pictures about it and watching them regularly, or even printing them and hanging them on the walls of one’s room, is another.
      I don’t want to equate murder fantasies with sexual ones. My point is to illustrate that it feels to me and obviously a lot of other people that there are significant differences between pure imagination and creating something tangible out of it.

      • MareOfNights@discuss.tchncs.de
        cake
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        12
        ·
        2 months ago

        Oh no, hanging the pictures on your wall is fucked.

        The difference is if someone else can reasonably find out. If I tell someone that I think about them/someone else while masturbating, that is sexual harassment. If I have pictures on my wall and guests could see them, that’s sexual harassment.

        If I just have an encrypted folder, not a problem.

        It’s like the difference between thinking someone is ugly and saying it.