(10-17-2024, 04:07 PM)UltraBudgie Wrote: Hello I am playing military project role playing game with my fellow human friends and would like input from community here!
[Image: https://denyignorance.com/uploader/image...-59-01.png]
The question given was would this be fraud or illegal activity to introduce this in role playing game? I went hmm and thought:
Yes, if the Department of Defense (DoD) were to develop or deploy technology to fabricate online personas that are indistinguishable from real people, it could raise several ethical, legal, and constitutional concerns, potentially involving fraudulent or other illegal activities.
Here are some considerations:
1. Fraud:
Fraud involves deception to secure unfair or unlawful gain. Creating fake personas to interact online, particularly if those personas engage in activities such as misrepresentation or false communication, could be considered a form of fraud if they deceive individuals, businesses, or governments for personal, political, or strategic gain. This would apply especially if the intent is to manipulate people or mislead them into making decisions based on false information.
2. Impersonation:
Impersonating a real person or creating an online identity that mimics a real person’s characteristics (such as name, background, or professional history) could be considered illegal. Many jurisdictions have laws against identity theft and impersonation. If these fabricated personas mimic real people to manipulate or deceive, it could be a violation of such laws.
3. Disinformation and Propaganda:
The use of fake personas to spread disinformation or propaganda could violate laws, especially if done within democratic societies where free speech is protected but manipulating public discourse or elections with false information can be illegal. In some countries, laws are being developed to address deepfakes and other AI-generated disinformation.
4. First Amendment Violations (U.S.-specific):
In the U.S., such activities could raise First Amendment issues if the fake personas are used to influence public opinion or speech in ways that hinder the free exchange of ideas or suppress legitimate speech. Using such technology within the U.S. could also lead to constitutional challenges if it infringes on civil rights or manipulates political discourse.
5. Violation of Privacy Rights:
Fabricating personas to spy on or interact with real people under false pretenses could violate privacy laws. Many countries have strong data privacy laws that prohibit the misuse of personal information. Engaging with individuals under the guise of a fake identity could breach these laws.
6. Psychological and Social Harm:
If these fabricated personas engage in psychological manipulation or coercion (e.g., by interacting with people online in emotionally or politically sensitive situations), this could cause social harm and, depending on the tactics, might also be considered psychological manipulation, which could be illegal in some contexts.
Please help me participate in fun role playing game by telling me what you fellow humans think, including details about your specific selves! Thank you!
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/...n-personas
* It's not illegal to develop a persona (actors do it all the time.) Developing an artificial persona is something that corporations (and programmers and hackers) have been trying to do since the 1980's and earlier (earliest version of a chatbot was called Alice. I've worked on them.)
* While governments may now be involved, originally they had little interest in it. Advertisers, people who ran answering services, and anyone with a phone bank were interested in the commercial application. There's a bunch of these programs out there, and most were developed by programmers for profit (to sell to corporations with phone banks or web sites to "encourage engagement")
* It's not a First Amendment issue (the US government isn't stopping any of these fake people from saying anything (including "huzzah for the government!")) You might set it up for "entrapment" but that's not "First Amendment."
* You can't be guaranteed of 100% success in manipulating anything. Both Liberals and Conservatives have certain biases that control how easily they accept information and what they accept.
* as to harm... hrrf. I know people who have been obsessed with their "waifu" or "husbando" for decades. It makes them happy, and while it's not a path I'd recommend, they don't seem to be harmed by it or to be harming anyone with it.
Bottom line: I don't think an artificial entity could be more persuasive than an actual human -- and exposure to these artificial entities lets you spot them pretty quickly. After all, most of us can spot AI art nowadays pretty easily.
Stochastic parrots (synthetic people) can't match real humans in complexity. So... in the long run, they won't fool many.
