this post was submitted on 20 Nov 2024
162 points (100.0% liked)

Not The Onion

12543 readers
1089 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

  1. Links to news stories from...
  2. ...credible sources, with...
  3. ...their original headlines, that...
  4. ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Comments must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

A leading misinformation expert is being accused of citing non-existent sources to defend Minnesota’s new law banning election misinformation.

At the behest of Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison, Hancock recently submitted an affidavit supporting new legislation that bans the use of so-called “deep fake” technology to influence an election. The law is being challenged in federal court by a conservative YouTuber and Republican state Rep. Mary Franson of Alexandria for violating First Amendment free speech protections.

Hancock’s expert declaration in support of the deep fake law cites numerous academic works. But several of those sources do not appear to exist, and the lawyers challenging the law say they appear to have been made up by artificial intelligence software like ChatGPT.

top 3 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 37 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I mean low-key that's kind of a brilliant way to make the argument.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

Can fucking stupid come full circle all the wayback to brilliant?

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 month ago

deep fakes should absolutely not be protected under free speech. that should be treated as impersonation with malicious intent