I recently used an artificial-intelligence program to create a headshot for my social media accounts. The program asked me to upload several pictures of myself and select clothing choices and background locales. It then spit out a number of A.I.-created photos.
I was pleased with the results. The A.I. photos looked like me, just slightly improved — fuller hair, fewer wrinkles, etc. I uploaded the best one to my social media accounts and, within minutes, over-the-top compliments started rolling in. “Stunning,” “Crazy gorgeous!” — the commentary went on for days.
My husband thinks I’m being dishonest by not disclosing that my headshot was generated by A.I. I disagree. Individuals and magazines publish photoshopped pictures all the time without disclosure. So I ask you: As a private individual, do I have an obligation to mark my profile picture on social media as A.I.-generated? — Name Withheld
From the Ethicist:
People typically use their self-representation on social media — in images as much as in words — to put themselves in a good light. Image curation is not a “warts and all” affair. So it’s hard to see how anyone could suffer from this misrepresentation of yours. It sounds as though this picture looks like a realistic portrait of you after a visit to your hairdresser (applying subtle extensions) and a makeup artist — it’s your Vogue version.
It’s also worth zooming out and acknowledging that nearly every photo of ourselves today is already highly mediated by technology. With a newer iPhone, a simple shot uses machine-learning algorithms to decide how to light your face, smooth shadows, boost colors and so on. Even the auto-enhance feature does something not so radically remote from what these A.I. portraits do, just less obviously. So the distinction between natural and artificial isn’t as sharp as we often assume. We are all yassified now. And what about the way people stick to the same photo even after the passage of several years — the photo taken when their hair really was thicker and their wrinkles fewer? We generally allow that kind of soft editing of time without feeling deceived.
Still, you’re taking things a big step further. When old friends greet you IRL, you want to see them lighting up with fondness, not suppressing a wince because their mental image has just crashed into reality. So what harm is there in crediting your digital accomplice? If you’re posting any other pictures of yourself, the discrepancies will be evident. And it’s odd to take special pleasure in the praise for your A.I.-adjusted image; it’s a little like being complimented for baking the cheesecake you got from the frozen section — gratifying for a moment, but with an unpleasant lingering aftertaste.
Thoughts? If you would like to share a response to today’s dilemma with the Ethicist and other subscribers in the next newsletter, fill out this form.
A Bonus Question
A woman I grew up with has a husband who has twice been inappropriate with me in public places. Once, at a bar, he suddenly leaned over and stuck his tongue in my ear. I was too stunned to respond. I tried to pretend it didn’t happen, and I moved away from him. Another time, at a party I was throwing, he moved to kiss me out of the blue, angling his head as though for a romantic kiss instead of a peck. I turned my face to the side at the last second.
Both incidents occurred in rooms full of people, his wife included, but she was not within viewing distance either time. I hardly ever see this couple, and I don’t know the husband at all. There is no mutual friend of ours I could run this by. What, if anything, should I do? — Name Withheld
From the Ethicist:
What you describe is deeply inappropriate and concerning. You shouldn’t have to tolerate this kind of behavior, and it’s understandable that you’re wondering what to do.
Because you hardly ever see this couple, one option is to simply avoid the husband and stay out of situations where he might have access to you. But if you’re comfortable addressing the matter, you might consider sending him a message saying that his behavior has been unacceptable and must never happen again. I imagine he will deny, bluster, claim he was drunk, that it was a joke. He will say you misunderstood. But he will understand you.
Another option is to tell his wife. If she’s unaware, she may appreciate knowing, though there’s also a risk that she will react defensively or dismissively. (Of course, she may already know and be struggling with his actions — or, less charitably, excusing them.) Were you to tell her, you could frame it as a concern rather than an accusation. They may avoid you in the future — and that might be a good outcome. Whatever you decide, the burden of correcting his behavior doesn’t fall on you. His actions are his responsibility.
Readers Respond
The previous question was from a reader wondering whether or not to leave her hairdresser a negative online review. She wrote: “I’ve been going to a hairstylist who promotes his all-natural, organic dye as healthy for hair. I never questioned it, until at my most recent visit he dyed my hair the wrong color. When I asked him to fix it, he made it even worse, turning my hair a deep mahogany instead of the golden copper I requested. … Frustrated, I researched the dye brand he used and was horrified to learn that its key ingredient, ethanolamine, is potentially more damaging to hair than ammonia, and I’ve read that it could be carcinogenic. … I sympathize with him as a small-business owner, but I also feel compelled to warn people that his ‘healthy’ dye may not be as safe as he claims. … Would posting a negative review protect others or punish him by potentially putting his small business at risk? What’s the right thing to do?”
In his response, the Ethicist noted: “Two key questions are whether your stylist knowingly misrepresented the product and whether it really poses health risks. … It’s entirely possible he genuinely believed what he was saying. Companies often use carefully crafted language to make their dyes sound especially ‘natural.’ … Your stylist may simply be parroting what the product reps told him. … If you do write a review, focusing on your personal experience — the color errors and how the stylist responded — would be the fairest and most helpful approach. There’s no clear legal definition of ‘natural’ for cosmetic products; the status of ethanolamine is complicated; and unless you feel confident explaining it clearly, it may not be the most relevant detail to include. … Fairness and accuracy should be your guide — misleading claims, whether from stylists or clients, don’t serve anyone well.” (Reread the full question and answer here.)
⬥
It’s appropriate to write a fair and measured review presenting the situation. The letter writer, however, is not a scientist. Her information about the dye, as the Ethicist points out, is incomplete at best and completely wrong at worst. She should not include anything about the nature of the dye in her review. — Rebecca
⬥
It seems to me that if a hairstylist promotes his business as “all-natural” or “organic,” and the products he uses are neither, the letter writer has every right to disclose this fact in her review. If doing so ruins the man’s business, then too bad. His claims are misleading. — Lin
⬥
A clear and much appreciated clarification of key concepts from the Ethicist, as usual. I love this column! I think our questioner, however, should have a respectful face-to-face conversation with the hairdresser. Doing so can both clear the air and avoid unintended harmful consequences. — Schelby
⬥
As a small-business owner, I appreciate when a customer comes to me first to discuss a bad experience, rather than immediately leaving a bad review. If I were the letter writer, I would educate the hairdresser about the dye’s contents first, and if he does nothing, only then would I write the negative review. — Kim
⬥
I am a hair-color educator, and formerly was a national education manager for one of the top-selling hair-color lines. I, myself, fell for the “greenwashing,” and spent years trying to dress hair “naturally.” The truth is that there is no safe way to color hair because the dye pigments are derived from petrochemicals. The activation chemicals used (ammonia, ethanolamine, etc.) are window dressing on this fundamental problem. — Douglas
Kwame Anthony Appiah is The New York Times Magazine’s Ethicist columnist and teaches philosophy at N.Y.U. To submit a query, send an email to [email protected].
The post Can I Use A.I. to Look Better Online? appeared first on New York Times.
