The targeted women included heads of state, first ladies, royalty, legislators, government officials, journalists, TV presenters, athletes, entertainers, and other public figures.
Investigators said users could browse material by tags including “rape,” “forced,” “degradation,” and “slave.” Those categories are a big reason why prosecutors framed the case as abuse and exploitation rather than a copyright or impersonation dispute.
You must log in or register to comment.
- 17 hours
Good. Great. Awesome.
Yet only the rich get protection, the everyday girls and women have to see their artificial nudes on X while trying to avoid their coworkers and classmates laughing about it. Two tiered justice.
- krashmo@lemmy.worldEnglish15 hours
You guys can all make deep fake nudes of me if you want. I’m not saying everyone should feel like me but I promise you I would not care even one little bit.
- 15 hours
So long as you don’t use your consent as an assumption to assume others do/should consent, then sure, great, cool, whatever. Can’t help but notice your lack of pictures on your account so seems more like theoretical thing as opposed to something someone could choose to do against you.
But schools are literally being blackmailed with deep faked photos of their students. I’m infinitely more concerned for those boys and girls wellbeing that a handful of famous folk with Lawyers and PR teams.
- krashmo@lemmy.worldEnglish14 hours
I’m happy to provide a picture if you think making some deep fakes would make you feel better. Also, as I said, people are allowed to be upset by whatever they choose. If deep fakes of you exist and that upsets you then feel free to rage about it all you like. I don’t see the point in feeling anything more than annoyed at having to explain that the pictures are fake but, again, that’s just me.
- 6 hours
Gonna recommend you look for reports of people who feel differently from you on this, read their stories and emotional accounts of going through this, with some empathy.
- krashmo@lemmy.worldEnglish5 hours
I understand the logic of it just fine. Disagreeing with the response is not a sign of a lack of empathy. I’ve said repeatedly that people can feel how they want. I find it ironic that those of you purporting to be open minded are the ones trying to control how others feel about this topic.
- 2 hours
Disagreeing with the response is not a sign of a lack of empathy.
Then stop this trolling. No one cares if you personally wouldn’t be hurt by something that is actively hurting untold number of women and children. Your personal opinion was never the topic of discussion.
- zbyte64@awful.systemsEnglish3 hours
The fact you think this is only about people’s feelings and not the material reality of bullying speaks volumes. Then you go onto gaslight people over your lack of awareness of the situation. Please share this encounter with your therapist or find a therapist before I start decoding your projections for the internet to see.
- Pennomi@lemmy.worldEnglish18 hours
Nice, maybe we should also seize any AI sites being used to generate sexual images of minors.
Oh no wait, it’s okay if you’re a trillionaire, carry on.
- GenosseFlosse@feddit.orgEnglish7 hours
Well let’s all have grok generate the same images, share them on x and find out.
- dil@piefed.zipEnglish17 hours
Ive noticed they only take down stuff for politicians not underage actors or celebs or influencers or ppl in general, but anything nsfw about politicians is swiftly taken down even on reddit
17 hoursOr, yk, improve wages across the spread so fewer people feel compelled to go in that direction?
