IM FUCJING SORRY WHAT IT WAS HIS SISTER WHO MADE THE VIDEO!?? shut it down shut all of it down i am going to instigate the butlerian jihad actually fucking for real jesus christ
They don't even think, it's faked. It's just repeating words and the order relating those words together to string a coherent sentence together. AI literally fakes intelligence! It's sophisticated fakery, but still fake.
The killer should respond with their own "AI" video of the guy saying he didn't mind getting stabbed at all and doesn't want to press charges since he's no longer really dead
"it's like a slideshow or memorial for an impact statement"
just do that. write a fucking statement. read it. write a poem. say that you feel he would have forgiven his killer i don't care but like this is so fucking ghoulish
"it's my grieving process" then your process is wrong and you should fix yourself. i'm not giving this shit an inch it's fucking ghoulish and delusional
The grieving process needs to include regularly asking yourself the question, “If this was the 1850s, would I have been scammed by phony spirit mediums?”
she presumably worked with some company to produce this shit since I'm not aware of any consumer-level free tools that can do something like that, so I'd really like some details on who's charging grieving family members for an e-seance
EXACTLY! Sometimes people, *especially emotionally vulnerable people* need to be told "no!" You're not actually doing anyone a service but empowering them to practice digital necromancy on their dead loved-ones.
I'm honestly not very familiar with the concept of US victim impact statements, but the basic gist of it seems to be 'X person has already been found guilty, now we want to see how much we need to punish them' So it's basically like an open invitation for a very formal form of just revenge
It was introduced after the Manson murders because the Tate family worried the murderers would get parole because they were under someone else's influence.
Came into common use in the 80s and 90s as part of the victim's rights movement...
...and I can see the point, because to be a victim of a violent crime is to lose a sense of power and allowing them to confront the perpetrator is a way to restore that sense of self-determination.
Using AI to put words in a dead man's mouth is so beyond that, though. So gross.
That's *exactly* what a "victim impact statement" is. Mainly started during the Regan era and it was created by people who felt like judges, left to their own devices, don't punish people harshly enough. Part of the same wave as mandatory minimum sentences. Designed to put more in prison for longer.
I get it in theory: after the wheels of justice get moving you, as a victim, are rarely near control of the process beyond being a material witness (itself often a brutal experience, if the defense is any good). Victim input, esp in the US, can even be forgiving/petitioning for a lighter sentence.
Seems like I wasn't far off, but I still don't get how 'Argue for maximum punishment' helps anybody's grieving process: Punishment is not bringing back someone's loved one for example and fully bypasses not just addressing the material author of the crime system's failure to protect people.
Dead people can't provide sentencing input of ANY kind, period, hard stop, and it is a bad idea to ever allow that to even exist as a concept unless you want the government showing up with AI videos begging for the death penalty.
Like maybe I'm missing something but absolutely nothing of the above has anything to do with victim grieving process unless we accept that 'Revenge is actually a good thing under this specific circunstantes' which well, no I'm not gonna concede.
I hate the absolute infiltration of Ai into literally fucking every part of our lives. I think it’s a cancer and will ultimately blow up spectacularly.
I saw this headline and immediately was filled with bile and vitriol and hate and a million other adjectives.
Yeah like 1) "my grieving process is making an AI corpse puppet of my brother" Sick, fucked up, but like I can't stop you.
2) "my grieving process is making an AI corpse puppet of my brother which will apparently testify at a sentencing hearing somehow" No! No! We have a legal duty to stop you!
There is still a touch of that old western vengefulness in our criminal court system. It might not seem like it, but in cases where someone was a victim of violence, there is nothing quite like looking your attacker/abuser in the eyes and telling them how much you hate them and being heard.
This episode was merely a romantic, character-driven plot of the situation as well, focusing on the main character's inner conflict.
The episode didn't mention the very real possible problems of AI standing in as a legal representation of a deceased person, or identity theft of a living person.
the worst part of this, is that the judge was swayed by the "impact statement" and increased the sentencing from what the prosecutors were asking for- they were asking for 9.5, and he upped it to the maximum.
That judge needs to go take a tech literacy course.
they did a g-d awful AI voice thing in the netflix doc about Gabby Petito to have her journal entries & such read in "her voice" & it made me both sick to my stomach & livid.
...i guess it was effective if the goal was to make her sound as dead possible, but i dont think that was the intent.
This. We do not need to start letting technology hijack our identity after death to write some fantasy for the living. The sister should have spoken for herself.
No, it's their God given American right to necromance up their dead loved one and make them say things that they can't refute and act like it was their actual will. Totally the acts of a sane person.
from what I saw of the actual police report, the guy that was killed accosted the killer in a road rage incident, which explains why the video increased the sentence. it painted him in a better light.
I have no idea what the purpose is and neither do you! Because there's no clear reporting on the intentions of the people involved or even the process!
It's POSSIBLE from the reporting she wrote a script, it's possible she also asked an AI to look over his facebook page and then output a script of
"Once, men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free. But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them."
If any of my relatives made a generative AI puppet of my dead father, I'd have to be physically pulled off them because I would be sinking my teeth into their neck with full intent to kill for insulting his memory and life with an abomination that's trying to commodify the human soul.
Comments
wonder how she’s gonna feel in retrospect because thats something you cant take back
just do that. write a fucking statement. read it. write a poem. say that you feel he would have forgiven his killer i don't care but like this is so fucking ghoulish
Hell, AI defendents can just admit to the crimes. Imagine how much money and time will be saved! /s
Even if you think you know your sibling better than you know yourself...no, you don't. You don't know what they would say. They're fucking dead.
I'd be repulsed even if this were from the Onion.
Came into common use in the 80s and 90s as part of the victim's rights movement...
Using AI to put words in a dead man's mouth is so beyond that, though. So gross.
Unless they are witnesses, the family of the victim has no business in the courtroom.
I watched "Making of a Murderer" and I was pulling my hair out over how much the family of the victim impacts the case.
I saw this headline and immediately was filled with bile and vitriol and hate and a million other adjectives.
Then I watched it.
2) "my grieving process is making an AI corpse puppet of my brother which will apparently testify at a sentencing hearing somehow" No! No! We have a legal duty to stop you!
Like, I don't need to see literally anyone's arrests on a youtube bodycam channel.
Peak main character syndrome.
The episode didn't mention the very real possible problems of AI standing in as a legal representation of a deceased person, or identity theft of a living person.
That judge needs to go take a tech literacy course.
(And I thought putting ashes on the mantle was traumatic.)
THEN THEY AREN'T HIS WORDS?????
...i guess it was effective if the goal was to make her sound as dead possible, but i dont think that was the intent.
So if the goal of the impact statement was to reduce the sentence it sure as fuck failed!
The sister pointed out that her brother "believed in forgiveness", which I suppose makes him a good Christian and his death even more tragic.
She did *not* ask the judge to forgive his killer or even for leniency in sentencing.
It's POSSIBLE from the reporting she wrote a script, it's possible she also asked an AI to look over his facebook page and then output a script of
I said "If the point was X" because I do not claim to know that was the point.
I'll haunt this motherfucker for eternity.
- Reverend Mother Gaius Helen Mohiam