The Problem With Counterfeit (AI-generated) People ("an immoral act of vandalism")

[highplainsdem]

From philosophy professor Daniel Dennett in The Atlantic:

https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2023/05/problem-counterfeit-people/674075/

The Problem With Counterfeit People
Companies using AI to generate fake people are committing an immoral act of vandalism, and should be held liable.

By Daniel C. Dennett

MAY 16, 2023


Money has existed for several thousand years, and from the outset counterfeiting was recognized to be a very serious crime, one that in many cases calls for capital punishment because it undermines the trust on which society depends. Today, for the first time in history, thanks to artificial intelligence, it is possible for anybody to make counterfeit people who can pass for real in many of the new digital environments we have created. These counterfeit people are the most dangerous artifacts in human history, capable of destroying not just economies but human freedom itself. Before it’s too late (it may well be too late already) we must outlaw both the creation of counterfeit people and the “passing along” of counterfeit people. The penalties for either offense should be extremely severe, given that civilization itself is at risk.

-snip-

Creating counterfeit digital people risks destroying our civilization. Democracy depends on the informed (not misinformed) consent of the governed. By allowing the most economically and politically powerful people, corporations, and governments to control our attention, these systems will control us. Counterfeit people, by distracting and confusing us and by exploiting our most irresistible fears and anxieties, will lead us into temptation and, from there, into acquiescing to our own subjugation. The counterfeit people will talk us into adopting policies and convictions that will make us vulnerable to still more manipulation. Or we will simply turn off our attention and become passive and ignorant pawns. This is a terrifying prospect.

-snip-

As Harari says, we must “make it mandatory for AI to disclose that it is an AI.” How could we do that? By adopting a high-tech “watermark” system like the EURion Constellation, which now protects most of the world’s currencies. The system, though not foolproof, is exceedingly difficult and costly to overpower—not worth the effort, for almost all agents, even governments. Computer scientists similarly have the capacity to create almost indelible patterns that will scream FAKE! under almost all conditions—so long as the manufacturers of cellphones, computers, digital TVs, and other devices cooperate by installing the software that will interrupt any fake messages with a warning. Some computer scientists are already working on such measures, but unless we act swiftly, they will arrive too late to save us from drowning in the flood of counterfeits.

Did you know that the manufacturers of scanners have already installed software that responds to the EURion Constellation (or other watermarks) by interrupting any attempt to scan or photocopy legal currency? Creating new laws along these lines will require cooperation from the major participants, but they can be incentivized. Bad actors can expect to face horrific penalties if they get caught either disabling watermarks or passing on the products of the technology that have already been stripped somehow of their watermarks. AI companies (Google, OpenAI, and others) that create software with these counterfeiting capabilities should be held liable for any misuse of the products (and of the products of their products—remember, these systems can evolve on their own). That will keep companies that create or use AI—and their liability-insurance underwriters—very aggressive in making sure that people can easily tell when conversing with one of their AI products.

-snip-

I agree this counterfeiting needs to be stopped. Too many companies are pushing AI chatbots as "companions." As I recall, that was the word Google decided to use for its chatbot Bard, after it was obvious that it was pretty bad for search - as they should have expected with this type (LLM) of AI. We're told to think of AI tools for work as assistants or copilots. AI therapists are being marketed, along with AI girlfriends and boyfriends that I suppose you can talk to your AI therapist about.

The companies behind AI want us hooked on AI, charmed by it, dependent on it. Of course the people behind the sales pitches will sometimes admit, as OpenAI CEO Sam Altman has, that too-powerful AI could mean "lights-out for all of us." And he'll admit to being worried about misinformation in politics. Bur he doesn't want to be held responsible for giving possible bad actors AI tools that can do so much damage.

Dennett says that he isn't in favor of capital punishment for any crime, but "it would be reassuring to know that major executives, as well as their technicians, were in jeopardy of spending the rest of their life in prison in addition to paying billions in restitution for any violations or any harms done."

[MutantAndProud]

1. If you've been targeted and don't haven't connections or wealth to investigate or fight it

It’s basically too late. Reform or bust, the clock is ticking

[David__77]

2. This strikes me as backward and reactionary.

Also, it won’t work.

[SWBTATTReg]

3. I'd say one of the biggest problems w/ these AI-created personalities is that some will think that

these AI characters are real and strive to be like them, when there's really no way anyone can even compete w/ the AI entities. I can imagine that those in the modeling industry, the advertising industry, others are probably looking at this developing field somewhat in horror. The intelligence, hardware, and availability of this technology to the public is just beginning...just wait.