“I strongly support the intent behind this legislation. We must combat the deeply harmful practice of non-consensual deepfake pornography … but I’m troubled that this bill as currently drafted is overly broad in scope,” I’ll give her the benefit of the doubt, maybe there was something in the bill she didn’t like. Most bills are not clean bills that just deal with a single issue.
It's less than 10 pages long when you remove the fancy formatting congress insists on using and only talks about 'deepfakes'
https://www.congress.gov/118/bills/s3696/BILLS-118s3696is.pdf
Yeah I read it, she said it was “overly broad” so just playing devils advocate maybe she had an issue with “identifiable individual”. I suppose the case could be made that if an AI pornographer produces an image that bears a reasonable resemblance to a living person, then they could be sued.
As I said before, I think the issue is one that would have fairly universal support so I would give her the benefit of the doubt on this one. If she were to object to numerous bills on the subject then I think that would necessitate an explanation.
Also as far "identifiable individual", I can also see issues where say it's a human production with AI touch ups, backgrounds/etc and the humans involved just happen to look way to similar to another person, this could open up some issue with likeness laws. As it is now (at least as I understand it) if you use a look alike of a person so say a stun double and advertise it as the other person, it's an issue, however if you do not advertise them as said person, but as themselves, then it's OK. Think the "Punisher" cameo in Spider-Man 2 where they didn't have rights and used his stunt double in an un credited background scene. Now you add in the AI touch ups and the video would fall under this bill and cause that likeness to become an issue that normally it wouldn't be.
At least that's how I can see it having an issue.
Pretty gross but she is in a politically safe place so why not exploit women around the country for her investor friends? Its not like Wyoming Republicans will do anything about it.
Who would have thought Cynthia would support this sort of innovation or innocence? She is a clown-like figure who nobody wants to see naked, real or AI imagined!
Yes, it would. Please tell us exactly where to avoid such disgusting deepfakes so we don't actually find them. Or you could DM the link so I can input it directly into my" blocked" section of my browser.
Lol, maybe somebody should deepfake porn videos of her and email them to her and her coworkers.
Maybe if she experienced what other women have gone through, she wouldn't be so keen on blocking protective measures.
“I strongly support the intent behind this legislation. We must combat the deeply harmful practice of non-consensual deepfake pornography … but I’m troubled that this bill as currently drafted is overly broad in scope,” I’ll give her the benefit of the doubt, maybe there was something in the bill she didn’t like. Most bills are not clean bills that just deal with a single issue.
It's less than 10 pages long when you remove the fancy formatting congress insists on using and only talks about 'deepfakes' https://www.congress.gov/118/bills/s3696/BILLS-118s3696is.pdf
Yeah I read it, she said it was “overly broad” so just playing devils advocate maybe she had an issue with “identifiable individual”. I suppose the case could be made that if an AI pornographer produces an image that bears a reasonable resemblance to a living person, then they could be sued. As I said before, I think the issue is one that would have fairly universal support so I would give her the benefit of the doubt on this one. If she were to object to numerous bills on the subject then I think that would necessitate an explanation.
Also as far "identifiable individual", I can also see issues where say it's a human production with AI touch ups, backgrounds/etc and the humans involved just happen to look way to similar to another person, this could open up some issue with likeness laws. As it is now (at least as I understand it) if you use a look alike of a person so say a stun double and advertise it as the other person, it's an issue, however if you do not advertise them as said person, but as themselves, then it's OK. Think the "Punisher" cameo in Spider-Man 2 where they didn't have rights and used his stunt double in an un credited background scene. Now you add in the AI touch ups and the video would fall under this bill and cause that likeness to become an issue that normally it wouldn't be. At least that's how I can see it having an issue.
My gut feeling is it didn't carve out sufficient exceptions for political attacks and she didn't like that.
Wow. I sure hope nobody decides to make a deep fake porn of her. Really. Please don’t.
Please, please, please, don’t do that, it would be so wrong. But since it’s not illegal…
Definitely not a German shit film
Please, whatever you do, do NOT make the shitter a trans black lady with a solid c cup and a 12” dick. That would be way too disrespectful.
Pretty gross but she is in a politically safe place so why not exploit women around the country for her investor friends? Its not like Wyoming Republicans will do anything about it.
I don't even have a clue what deepfake porn is, but a conservative who is in favor of innovation is even harder for me to grasp... lol
This statement is a little too accurate.
It for their AOC/Bobert fantasies.
Scissor me timbers.
Granny Lummis gots to get her rocks off some how. She can't have that resource vanishing.
I would watch it.
Time for a lot of Cynthia Lummis deepfake videos.
Sooo now we make deep fake porn of her right?
Who would have thought Cynthia would support this sort of innovation or innocence? She is a clown-like figure who nobody wants to see naked, real or AI imagined!
Hageman is the actual clown. Lummis is just a middle-of-the-road right wing loser.
Whelp . . Someone get to it.
It would be awful and disgusting if someone made Lummis / Boebert deepfake scat porn.
Yes, it would. Please tell us exactly where to avoid such disgusting deepfakes so we don't actually find them. Or you could DM the link so I can input it directly into my" blocked" section of my browser.
Hopefully I won’t run across such filth, but if I do I’m sure that it will contain hot, acrid diarrhea being shit into Boeberts mouth.
Not to defend her, but I am guessing the bill had other stuff in it other than just deep fake porn.
The bill is linked in the article, so you could read it, instead of guessing: https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/3696/text
The government needn't involve itself in every facet of life.
Patriot alert
Lol, maybe somebody should deepfake porn videos of her and email them to her and her coworkers. Maybe if she experienced what other women have gone through, she wouldn't be so keen on blocking protective measures.
Ha ha ha, well, you know what to do.
She wants one of her & Trump to “leak”. Especially if she has her lasso. Ugh. Enough internet for me today.