What's the defense? Intelligent screening of incoming messages so that the threat never reaches the blackmail target? I imagine they'll find an unprotected channel.
Don't post innocuous images of children ever? Seems like losing.
I do have to say that I find it disturbing how liberally parents seem to post pictures of their children in public though. Respect the privacy of your children, they’re not your pets.
Such things were printed and handed out and rarely made it past that years parents and students and the school archive (physical visit required).
For the Dux's and general high performers, less time than I've been alive.
For entire classrooms to be posted up via live streams, Insta, tok's, etc ... barely a decade or so.
It's not something that was always normal, and just because it's become "normalised" doesn't mean it must remain that way.
I think a school news letter / yearbook is cute, but it should be private and only for the students and parents. A physical version would be best, you can put those in the archive instead of realize 20 years later that the digital versions are gone.
Saying "you shouldn't do this thing that was basically harmless from the birth of photography until the ~2010's" is ignoring a lot of history and context.
Same defenses that are used against fraud and other crime.
criminal prosecution of the blackmailers AND the services used to generate the pictures.
This is effectively child porn... so penalties would be pretty harsh.
There are extradition treaties to most of the world, so unless the blackmailers are in China/Russia they will end up in jail.
That same thing played out with piracy with people extradited to the US from various countries
Prosecution of AI operators for making indecent images of children?
Hackers and blackmailers on the internet can be anywhere from trivial to impossible to identify.
Even harder to prosecute when they're in a different jurisdiction, as not everywhere has extradition treaties to everywhere else. I wouldn't be overly surprised if e.g. the North Korean government runs some schemes like this (though not necessarily actually this) to bring in money.
But yes, definitely do the easy things first, like trying to stop e.g. grok from doing it and also going after users of e.g. grok who try to get around such efforts. A lot more crime happens than can be prosecuted, so raising the minimum competence threshold to commit crimes in the first place is very necessary.
Or to elect me as god-emperor and unify the world under my rule.
You won't prevent people stabbing others with knife by banning knife or asking people to wear knife-proof vest going outside. You deter them by making everybody know that the consequence of harming somebody else is going to be a very unpleasant experience.
Prosecuting every one of those blackmailers. If this kind of crime starts going into the "you're gonna get caught and jailed 100%" category, less people will try it.
Model makers, arguably, are like pencil manufacturers but in a World of good artists.
I think you can hold people to account for what they help to create, but not what they have potential to do.
Now, if models were trained on any csam, of course, the model's owners should be held you account.
I still think there's a lot of legal and IP landmines lying in wait from the Hoover-esque pre-training eras
Agreed on your second remark. If I'm still around it will be interesting to look back on this period on twenty years and think about how things should have been handled.
Don’t raise boys who abuse girls. That’d be a big step in the right direction.
[0] https://www.abs.gov.au/media-centre/media-releases/97-cent-s...
As an aside, please do not use the b-mail word. It is insensitive towards BIPOCs.
No it isn't. If anything needs to stop its the ever escalating orwellian censorship of words that you're proposing.