We didn't solve teens doctoring inappropriate images of their classmates by banning Photoshop or accepting it as the new normal. We solved it by passing laws which criminalise the behaviour and enforcing them to deter the behaviour.
Technology influences society. But plenty of social mores are almost universally respected despite being difficult to enforce. Possible and difficult to enforce doesn't force permissibility.
I don't accept the idea that "passing laws and enforcing them to deter behavior" was the cause of the lack of issues, because to be a deterrent us teens would have had to been aware of the laws.
Same. And same.
Drawing inappropriate pictures of your classmates was creepy before. Making Photoshop or AI porn remains so now. Most people won't do it. But there is active social reinforcement that keeps it from becoming "the new reality."
> don't accept the idea that "passing laws and enforcing them to deter behavior" was the cause of the lack of issue
Fair enough.
The jargon was cyberbullying, and there was absolutely legislative activity around horrific examples. But the principal mechanism of action probably wasn't a direct fear of getting caught and punished, but the prompted discussion reinforcing and extending the norm.
I thought we have general laws around sexual harassment and revenge porn which criminalize the point of harm.
I bring this up because most of the enforcement difficulty seems to stem from a desire to to control behavior which would otherwise be undetectable.
I believe we already have means of enforcement for students sharing pornography of their classmates.
At least as far as criminal harassment goes. Schools can adopt more restrictive policies but the consequences would only be suspension, expulsion, etc. not criminal charges.
What if they do so publicly?
If the police actually tried to prosecute them for harassment, the question the courts would be asking is, "could Jane reasonably avoid having to hear it?" Harassment is about being able to not be the recipient of communications you don't want to receive. Calling Jane fat on message boards, twitter, in a bar, etc. would all be fair game.
There's more restrictions if Jane is a captive audience. The courts have ruled that certain settings where people can't easily just leave - namely work and school - have greater restrictions. Again, the question the court would be asking is "can Jane reasonably avoid this speech" and it's a much bigger barrier to leave one's workplace than walk out of the bar.
There will be a time when the Trump "grab them by the you know what" style scandal will just be met with sceptism.
Where do you go when even video evidence can't be seen as the truth?
If the video is edited or comes from a source that doesn’t have trusted keys then it’s no better than some random tweet
I think the reality is that photographs and video are now like text, you trust the source or not.
I can write about Cleopatra's ability to snowboard and play Xbox, or I can make a photo with the caption "Cleopatra doing a 1080", and now I can make a video of it (probably).
I can also give you a certificate/key/blockchain whatever to prove it's "valid".