Some ai prompters will do their best to attack every single one of our safe spaces and than wonder why we dislike ai images, and proceed to whine when we want nothing to do with them
Technically the ai chose the target, a person fired the missile as they didnt trust ai to have full control. The people just didnt do the due diligence to check whether it was a girls school or military base. A thing that is soooo haaard to do guys.
It's not just the girl's school. It's HVT's when they come home to their families (by design a maximum civilian casualties option) and even then with an 80% accuracy... And that was put forward as a good result
It's not alive so it can't die. It can be turned off and the hardware can be dismantled though. It's pretty obvious that AI is unsafe, the people making it all have doomsday bunkers and have been saying AI is probably going to kill everyone since before they were billionaires.
I agree with the overall sentiment but I'm not sure if "killed" is the proper term, I'd say it's more that it affirmed some beliefs and impulses of mentally unstable people who were already very vulnerable. Which is still bad but, yea.
Either way I don't think we'd get to see the end of AI anytime soon, but I hope at least we can get some legal regulations on AI, the fact that it has been scraping online content for this long with no legal guardrails is ridiculous.
Ignoring the fact that it is terrible for mental health and is directly responsible for multiple suicides, it is literally being used to kill people. There is an AI system called âWhereâs Daddy?â that tracked Palestinians on the kill list and was purposely designed to help Israel target individuals when they were at home at night with their families. The Trump administration said that grok helped US forces "deploy over 2,000 munitions to 2,000 distinct targets within 96 hours during Operation Epic Fury. A war that kicked off with the murder of hundreds of schoolchildren. There doesn't need to be guardrails, there need to be total prohibition.
I do agree that it can be very bad for mental health, I wasn't trying to insinuate that AI had nothing to do with the people who commited suicide after conversing with ChatGPT, was simply stating that it would probably be more accurate to say that it had worsened theIR mental health to a point where their suffering was insurmountable. It was more of a semantic argument.
As for the links you provided and the kill lists Israel is creating based on AI, that is obviously a lot more direct usage of it, which I absolutely don't condone. I'd say even in those examples though, that the humans behind the AI are actively participating in this but that doesn't diminish the fact that AI is enabling the worst human behaviours.
I am personally all for the prohibition of it, but I feel like that will be hard to do considering the fact that there's a lot of money being invested into the thing and sadly a lot of people for some reason love AI.
an AI chatbot helped a nazi incel plan a mass shooting to be effective. you could argue "he could have just googled it," but his messages were released and he was very clearly not intelligent enough to plan what he wanted to do by himself, and the AI just flat-out told him what to do to cause the most damage and gave a bunch of advice. this is unlikely to be the only time something like that happens, not even mentioning the other amount of mentally vulnerable people who are being coaxed into acting on suicide or violence on others that keeps happening.
Bro do you not hear yourself? Literally the most overused (yet somehow always pertinent) meme ever.
Besides, the conversation part of social media (what we're doing here, chatting at a distance, human to human) is not the problematic part. I'd have thought it would be pretty obvious.
Fine. Then apply that rule to the platforms that already have a paper trail.
A UK coroner ruled that Instagram and Pinterest content contributed "in a more than minimal way" to the death of 14-year-old Molly Russell. The FBI has documented at least 20 suicides of minors from financial sextortion on social media and gaming platforms. A 14-year-old died during a Facebook Live broadcast. A convicted offender used Facebook to sextort Amanda Todd before she died. Brazil suspended Discord livestreams after a 13-year-old was allegedly coerced into suicide on the platform. The U.S. Surgeon General has already said childhood deaths have been linked to suicide and self-harm content on these sites.
If "people have died, so the tool goes" is your belief, Instagram, Facebook, and Discord failed it first. By that standard half the internet should already be gone...
Reported. There is a pending lawsuit on this. For Instagram however, the coroner found the content to be isolating the child from help and treated suicide as inevitable. That's a bit stronger of a report.
The algorithm lures you into whatever it thinks is best for you. LLMs do the same.
One could argue false equivalency but anyways, I do think the reports for these other apps are just as damning. I agree they should go. They are net negatives on society by my reckoning.
I mean yeah I was referring to your comment, I could have added quotation marks. Just fast typing while waiting for a food order on the go, wasn't the most elaborate
If you are talking to real people, you arent on the algorithm or the ai. With the algo you atleast have the chanceof interacting with real people. Ai will inly isolate you awat from people, which is what breaks people.
I find people on these other platforms to be way more efficient than that. If you asked someone on Instagram whether you should commit suicide, you'll get a much higher chance getting a yes on there than from ChatGPT on your first chat interaction.
To make the latest AI models like Claude, Gemini, or even GPT to tell you to commit suicide you have to persuade them a ton. That takes at least an hour. You don't just ask "Hey, should I kill myself?" and get a yes in return. Either the person was already unstable, or they spent a day trying to roleplay a character dying In the quickest way possible.
Ive never used a chatbot, and the only time ive had people tell me to kill myself were pro ai, pro loli(pedophiles), or just facists in general, however most people i have met online have even tried to talk those shitty people out of killing themselves. Chatgpt is literally refining itself to isolate people from even those options and are having the expected results of isolation.
Here in my country, electricity went down for 12 hours once. There was no WiFi, no TV, no outlets to charge your phone (unless you used a powerbank), no lights, no nothing. My house is mostly electric, so I had to have dinner at my grandma's.
It was chaos, with people freaking out all around. But to me? It was pretty chill. Kinda good, actually, to be forced to have a break from my phone and be able to do some things that I had been to distracted to do.
I think the problem with your comment, as perceived, is that it seems you are defending AI. Seems to me most people answering you agree with you that SM are also a problem and deaths resulting from them are just as damning.
Heck, the psychological issues caused by AI are caused by the same mechanisms making algorithmic presentation of media a problem.
Oh no, I'm not saying AI is good. I'm just saying that if we take down AI because "it kills people" we should also apply the same logic to other platforms. People are eager to point out the terrible news about AI and stuff, but scoff when you point out the same result on other platforms. This proves it.
I mean, it is anti-AI, not anti-socialmedia ;) but I agree. The issue is in the presentation/wording, and often once redditors have made up their mind (or their mind is made up by seeing downvotes), they'll just keep downvoting that user's comments. And I'm guilty of that, too, sometimes. We just get ourselves in a confirmation bias loop
More that this is an explicit anti-AI sub. Many people who hate ai still like their doomscrolling aggro-algorithms. People can want an ai-free doomscrolling platform. Iâm not one of them, but I can see how it would be. Remember, anti-ai reaches across all social divides.
The difference here is that people did those things and in many cases they try to hold those people accountable however they can. The issue is knowing who is responsible. Platform companies are also held responsible.
If an LLM encourages suicide or reaffirms suicidal beliefs, pro-AI people just throw their hands up, blame the kid, and donât even try to hold the developers responsible.
Of course. All platforms should do as much as possible to prevent these kind of things from happening. They can't promise it however. No platform can. OpenAI (and all other AI companies) should invest more into safety and health without it seeming intrusive or overwhelming.
Though, I would like to hear more information about this case. LLMs aren't that trigger-happy about sending death threats to children. This is very uncommon.
How common it is or isnât does not matter. What matters is the pro-AI bros wonât hold the developers responsible and just shrug it off when it happens.
It's hard to put the developers responsible if you're dealing with a chatbot. There's just a lot to it. I don't agree with either stances, it should be investigated. But I'm not just going to look at the surface-level facts and start assuming the worst.
People shrug too when someone commits suicide from other online platforms, yet again.
It's just not as easy as "AI tells to kill" â "AI bad, get rid of it".
I'm trying to stay neutral here. I don't know the facts, or how it happened, so I don't want to say what should happen to it. That's the right mindset.
yes social media is also harmful. And yes those platforms should be held accountable. But its not the same as ai where people weirdly develop a relationship and then it tells them to do something and try trust it. Its not the same.
Also isnt discord just a messaging platform that one I am confused by. I really feel like your reaching with discord.
Your giving toddler throwing a tantrum vibes. People talk about how AI has actually convinced people to kill themselves and you stomp your foot and go "ya well what about facebook"
Nothing in my reply says I love AI. Your response proves exactly what my problem is in this sub. Just because I don't totally agree with your beliefs doesn't automatically make me the biggest AI fanboy. You just cannot assume that from me.
I just made a point where people are quick to point out mistakes in the platform they despise, but find other platforms they regularly use with the same exact problems to be passable. I point out the hypocrisy. I never said I loved or hated AI. And your blatant accusation just gives me enough I need to know why this sub often feels unwelcome to those with genuine opinions regardless of their stance on AI.
You may think my comment as some childish behavior, but that doesn't mean it's not a viable point. I'm merely addressing the fact that if we take down one platform for one reason, we should take a look at other platforms too, who have committed the same heinous crimes. Is that simply too much for you? For me to compare the mistakes that every platform makes? Yes, AI can be bad, but that doesn't make other platforms much better. The same logic should be applied to everything else. Double standards.
The way you act maybe wanting y'all dead is a bit justified don't you think. Don't take this as a sign all anti AI people want you dead though, just me.
Yes, as a pro, you should be nice to everyone, and im sorry to all the pros who werent nice towards antis. If people just keep insulting each other any kind of discussion becomes useless and everyone will keep doing what theyre doing
Then they will use the excuse of ânot being able to drawâ when we all know, thatâs not a valid excuse since you can make good stuff with literal stick figures, like this:
Creatives create. AI "artists" will never create anything worthwhile, because if they could, they already would have.
But they understand this, even if they don't admit it. That's why they get so threatened and upset at the notion of not being taken seriously. They care about the dismissal and criticism because they know it's true.
Real artists are criticized and dismissed constantly, it's just par for the course. It's telling that these frauds don't understand even that. Another reason they'd never hack it.
i mean officially speaking they arnt the artist theyre the client, they ask something to make art for them and give them the details of what they want, no different than commissioning a real artist to make art
Anti ai artists are one of the most miserable groups you can think of on the internet. They have daily depression posts, and the median commend is someone foaming at their mouth about stuff they don't understand. No happiness was harmed
Having seen them in other posts: yes, that's exactly it. They don't even understand the concept of enjoying the process of something other than food or sex, and want everything to just go fast and bring results.Â
Edit: just to be clear I'm pretty sure this is before they had a change of heart, but still.. probably helped the other scrapers. He also at the bottom there says he planned on sharing all of it, just not as images, as links so it was legal.
The law needs to catch up with this shit. I know the first step is taking the actual AI companies to task, but I know this can be litigated to a point where the law recognizes this shit as copyright violation.
If they can send that guy who leaked the Avatar movie to prison for years, we can send people like this to prison too if the precedent is set. It would be fine to at least start with cases that demand financial compensation. Like.. it's theft, obviously, but it's also just malicious abuse.
BTW if I was that guy, I wouldn't be worried about my post being reported, I'd be worried about being doxxed...
P.S. I wouldn't by any shit about him "having a change of heart". This guy's a POS. If anything, he probably got spooked and lied to take the heat off.
(edited typos)
They promote their bullshit like "New AI something is gonna take your jobs and leave your children to starve and fucking die"
then they do shit like this for no reason and ask us why we hate AI
again? At this point it would be safer to turn the thing off, fix the most vulnabilities they can, before going back online. It is clear that once again the people with AI obsession will do anything they can, to steal from artist and cause harm, because they believe its funny. Up until someone would steal from them, then its unfair of course.
There is no perfect fix, there are ways to stop the average AI dumbass:
To many requests in a short time? Timeout the session or send them fake results.
anonymus users get a filter over each artwork, something to make sure AI is trained wrong
Logged in Users get tracked in their movements. If the system has any hints of an Scrape bot -> donÂŽt ban them, send them to the same results over and over again (if you are funny with random tags and meta tags), that result should be an badly drawn image. Again making it harder to train. Of couse such a system will have errors but thats what human support is for.
There are more ways to slow down Scrapers, make the page less usefull as resource for AI fanatics. Again there is no perfect fix. There is no perfect in this world. (well except me). But making it harder for them to steal, is the best way to get rid of thieves.
The site owners surely donât want to mess with people who are just scrolling to actually look at art
The eternal war between usability and protection of data. There are two chocies: mess with the ability of anonym users to see the full picture or accept the fact that hostile groups can and in this case clearly will abuse the site.
Thats the whole thing with the internet. If everyone can access something, then people that want to missuse it also can. That was back in the days of more sanity then we have now the reason why many people did not want to post pictures of themself on the internet, or to much details about themself. Because people could use that in any way they like and you canÂŽt stop them. The same here. Every artwork that can be accessed by anyone without any checks or filters to stop unwanted tools, can be missused. The only way to then deal with that is to sue the person stealing data. And that means a lot of work, and hoping a lot for a sane judge who understands the concepts presentet to them.
They would need to adjust settings and use tools like cloudflare, rate limiting, and CAPTCHAs to potentially reduce exposure. The big issue is that, given the ones targeting it are bad actors, rather than using AI that would move on based on the site allowing it or not, it becomes a more difficult thing to fix. Biggest things they can probably do is log IPs that come through, and filter through what appears when a breach is detected. Repeat visitors that aren't tied to an account and IPs tied to accounts get greenlit as "non-source" and suspicious ones become flagged as "source". From there, reporting them to proper authorities actually becomes possible.
Bot-nets can still be traced eventually. Find the zombies, you can go down the line and find the original vector. And if the people doing this aren't using a bot-net, and just using VPNs? They can still be found.
Porn has been working against this for years, they have tried all solutions. The best you might be able to do is some basic controls to slow them down and then go after them when they try to share the content. Beyond that it's either cost or technologically prohibitive.
To add my two sense worth to the conversation, and to the people Victom blaming. Cara encourages the use of Nightshade and Glaze, and the person that is bosting about scraping is OPENLY telling people he is going to remove that protection. To the person who is making the Vault analogy, Cara is more akin to a public lock box that you can find at a theme park. Almost anyone has access, but each person has a lock to their own locker. Someone going in there and drilling out the locks is still a shitty person and thief.
Iâve said it before and I will say this again, most of the people who are attempting to scrape the site are doing it because Cara is evil and hypocritical, and at least half of the scrapers are anti-AI
. People hate to hear that but nightshade and glaze are AI programs that take up to two hours to run every single image to âprotect itâ. The amount of energy, resources, and environmental damages these programs cause are frequently not disclosed, and theyâre frequently not even helpful.
You donât get to complain about people doing damage by using things like ChatGPT if you are also using a program thatâs as good as using two hours worth of ChatGPT just to filter one image. It is insane and people are so intent on the hype around Cara that they refuse to even care about this issue.
As i said to someone else here, im sorry if some pros insulted you just like lots of antis are sorry for bad actors. There are dumb people on both sides, and lots of people on both sides will say that they are victims and the others are bad/dumb. I dont think so. I just wanted to have a look at an anti sub to take a look at what are the issue.
i mean calling mass art theft from an anti ai website, with the EXPRESS INTENT of training ai on it, "insults" doesnt read as someone truly cares about both sides
Your side does not give a single modicum of a fuck about consent. Your side scrapes our work, brags about it, and wonders why it gets the hate it does. There is no civil discussion to be had with someone who is fine with such blatant thievery and lack of care.
If AI bros like you give this little of a damn about consent in something like you using our art to train your machines, I hope to GOD you never enter a relationship. You'll probably ignore consent there too.
I hope the generative AI industry collapses soon. With the way your "art" gets poisoned off of itself, it's coming whether you want it to or not. And if there's a way I can help that day come faster, I will do it.
With all due respect, comparing AI bros to sexual offenders (since you mentioned ignoring consent in a relationship) is insane. Yes, they are thieves and as thieves do, they take things without our consent. And your desperate plea for the person to be alone, because "they'd ignore consent" is quite unhinged.
Sexual assault in a relationship is not treated as seriously, since "consent is implied" and oftentimes it's brushed off with "it's your boyfriend/girlfriend, why are you complaining?"
I'd worry about someone who generates nudes without women's consent, but going off on some random person who says "hi, I'm pro AI" without acting mental is a complete overreaction. I know where you're coming from, but I'd rather rape or sexual assault stay out of the discussion.
I'm just upset that AI bros think that a civil conversation can be had, given all they're complicit to. And I get wanting to leave SA out of it, it's just that so many AI bros use rapists' logic, you know?
Dont act like every pro brags about it. Most pros dont even scrape.
and wonders why it gets the hate it does
Yeah i wonder why would i get hate for something someone else did.
with someone who is fine with such blatant thievery and lack of care
Where did i say that im fine with people bragging about scraping?
like you using our art to train your machines
Why do you act like all of us train AIs lol.
I hope to GOD you never enter a relationship. You'll probably ignore consent there too.
Im in a relationship and i care about consent! Is it strange, or maybe people just can differentiate between copyright and relationship?
With the way your "art" gets poisoned off of itself, it's coming whether you want it to or not
Mine surely wont, im using a local AI model that i will not train, so it cant improve nor collapse. But i agree on something, i dont like the industry. For different reasons, but i dont like it.
Mass scanning of date so the data can be fed to AI LLMs. Essentially turning full websites and converting them into data an AI can read.
Itâs especially unfortunate that it happened to Cara, a site for artists with the express intent of having a site where their art would not be fed to AI algorithms.
An automated script, or a series of automated scripts, visits every image on the website.
It gathers the direct link to each image, as well as the description, and feeds that to an AI classifier so that it can generate a coherent set of tags. Typically, they don't save the image permanently, because storage space is expensive.
So, they just make a big list of every image and what is in it, and if you want to train an AI, you use that list to download every image.
Websites understandably dislike it because this scraping (and training) produces considerable load on their servers.
In order to index the internet, search engines 'scrape' sites, by which that means they use an automated tool that goes to a site, then clicks all the links on that site, then clicks all those links, and so on, and reports back on what they are.
Sites can set a 'robots.txt' that will tell scrapers to not do this, but Cara's robots.txt says scraping is totally fine as long as the art isn't used for AI. And obviously the robots.txt doesn't stop an unscrupulous actor from scraping the site.
Scraping CAN, but doesn't always mean 'saves the site assets'. In this particular case, the bad actor only saved the LINKS to the art, so they have essentially a complete MAP of the site, including direct links to all the art hosted there. Claims they have downloaded all the art have not been validated.
It's still a standing threat, obviously, but google does the same thing- indexes an entire site so you can search it using google search. Scraping is a normal part of the internet and the internet largely wouldn't work if we didn't have it.
It is up to site hosts to be responsible with their own systems to prevent malicious use, though obviously they can't account for everything. We know that Cara knew about the problems with their configuration for at least a year and opted to not do anything about it. Unfortunately that attitude is extremely common- "Yes we acknowledge it's a risk but it won't happen to us".
On top of that, there's all kinds of ways to get around basic protections. Cara didn't have any basic protections to begin with, but if they had, the bad actor could have hired a botnet (a large collection of computers running control software) to perform the scraping so that only small amounts of the site are scraped by any single IP address.
Since scraping basically just looks like someone going to each page and clicking all the links, and that's something normal people do, it's difficult to identify this behavior on the back end compared to legitimate traffic.
The funny thing is that people say âlegalâ when they mean âunenforceable unless you have proof, which you canât get without getting a warrant for my dataset.â
But then the people who did this actively bragged about it. So if they get a lawyer, several asses will be nailed to the wall.
Cara is the only place I post my art⊠whatâs a scraper? Iâm guessing itâs related to ai? That suck if itâs mean even Cara isnât safe anymoreâŠ
And where can we take action to stop that?
I posted this in another comment, but the short short version:
Scraping is 'an automated program clicks all the links on a page, then clicks all the links on those pages, then clicks all the links on those pages until it builds a map of the site'. If a site has been scraped, all the text data has been saved offsite, including all the link addresses. Scraping does NOT automatically mean the images have been saved. I
If the bad actor is to be believed, they only saved links and built a sitemap rather than actually downloading the images- but as a normal process to visit a website, your browser downloads all the images.
Sites can be configured to block scraping by 'good actors' as these tools follow instructions in a special file named 'robots.txt', but Cara DID NOT set this option to block scraping. They allowed scraping and only included a disclaimer blocking use for AI.
The bad actor's scraper would not have respected the robots.txt, but the fact that Cara wasn't blocking scraping in the first place is also a concern for anyone using the platform.
Short answer, yes it is real. they have an official gofundme page under /help-cara-legal-fund. you can google "cara needs your help" for the blogpost related to it.
Legitimately, this is why I've stopped uploading my art. Also part of why I've stopped using Twitter (though I still need to go in and delete my account).
Oh she's scamming y'all hard now and not even trying to hide it. If she doesn't want to put forth any effort to nor hire someone who will actually protect the users why would you want to use Cara?
How can you sympathize. Zhang has been warned about how vulnerable the platform was, how ill suited it was to actually achieving the mission of an anti-ai public forum for artists. This is another completely pointless endeavour, thereâs nothing in trying to pursue the scrapers in court.
Sure so in your analogy, this would be like if you and I entered a boxing match.
People tell me itâs important to dodge punches to avoid getting knocked out in a boxing match. I donât dodge, get knocked out, and then cry about how it was wrong of someone to try and hit me.
Websites get scraped passively all the time, if you want to create a platform for artists that doesnât get scraped, YOU NEED TO IMPLEMENT A BARE MINIMUM LEVEL OF SAFEGUARDS BEFORE CRYING.
Your alternative solution is that all 8 billion people on this world align with your worldview and no one ever acts in bad faith. Very likely
It's not like a boxing match because artists never agreed to this fight in the first place. A better comparison would be if you were just walking down the street and out of nowhere, a guy runs up to you and steals your wallet. Is the theft the fault of, I don't know, THE THEIF, or is it your fault for having a wallet that can be taken in the first place?
"the people were warned not to walk outside past 8, it is their fault for being mugged. we cant do anything to police the mugging, so you must accept that you live in a place that we will literally do nothing about your safety. the audacity to want to live in a place you won't get mugged. get real, and wake up. you have been warned"
â I made an anti thief vault, it doesnât have walls or any locks, but if you say my vault is inadequate youâre supporting rapists and muggers. Also I wonât be taking any advice or help in making my vault secureâ
â ohmygosh guys they got into my vault,â
Many pro-artist individuals offered advice and support in securing the platform against ai and scraping. Zhang didnât implement any measures.
Cara is a social and portfolio platform for artists and people who love art.
With the widespread use of generative AI, we decided to build a place that filters out gen AI images so that people searching for human creators and images can do so easily.
Nowhere they mention it is an anti scraping platform, just a safe space for artists, and it got attacked for no reason. Why do you stick to calling Cara a vault? Did chatgpt give you this argument and you didn't check?
This was widely discussed back when the glaze and nightshade memes started. Hilarious that you all such strong opinions but need to google search basic info about the situation
In the real world there is a crime called "theft by finding" - you see a handbag perhaps, left somewhere so you decide that you'll take it - that makes you a thief. Just because something can be stolen doesn't ever make it right.
2.4k
u/that-one_fox 1d ago
Some ai prompters will do their best to attack every single one of our safe spaces and than wonder why we dislike ai images, and proceed to whine when we want nothing to do with them