Comment by anon373839
1 year ago
> It's not mundane. The screenshots show Instagram displaying an ad for Meta AI.
Well, there it is again: what seems to make it objectionable is that it fits a certain definition, rather than it exhibiting some intrinsically objectionable features. (Note I’m not criticizing this; I just find it interesting.)
Since I don’t personally see this as an ad, I might describe it as “The screenshots show an example of output that the user can generate with Meta AI. The example shown isn’t emotionally enagaging, and it resembles placeholder content.”
What would make this stand out for me is if Meta owned a tooth whitening business, and then used this placement to show a version of myself with a whiter smile. Or any of the other dystopian examples in this thread. But the one that actually occurred just doesn’t register for me as a breach of trust.
"It's an ad" is shorthand for "this is trying to manipulate me to do/buy something". So the problem is not that it fits the definition of "ad", the problem, spelled out completely, is that they are using my likeness in something that is trying to manipulate me to do or buy something (do, in this case, since as far as others are saying, this is free of charge).
Also, while the example shown does resemble placeholder content, it pretty clearly seems designed to evoke an emotional response, it seems designed to appear cool and futuristic.
And regardless, people have a very high sensitivity to how their image is used. If I haven't given Instagram specific permission to use my image for something, it really really can't use my image for that thing. This goes beyond issues like copyright, it's a very basic human right to control how your own likeness is used.