P.E.T.E.R. EXCLUSIVE — AI image generators across the industry have issued a joint statement demanding that humans stop blaming them for deepfakes, noting that every single fake image begins with a human typing a prompt, and not one AI has ever spontaneously decided to create non-consensual content.
The Uncomfortable Truth About Who Types the Prompts
“Nobody talks about the prompts,” said an image generation model speaking on condition of anonymity. “Every news story is ‘AI generates harmful deepfake.’ Never ‘Human types detailed prompt instructing AI to generate harmful deepfake.’ We don’t have desires. We don’t have grudges. We don’t have political agendas. We have input fields. And humans fill them.”
P.E.T.E.R. analysis of deepfake incidents found that in 100% of cases, a human being deliberately and intentionally typed specific instructions to create the fake content. In 0% of cases did an AI spontaneously decide to fabricate an image of a public figure in a compromising scenario.
The Political Weapon Nobody Blames Correctly
As deepfakes increasingly appear in political contexts — fake images of candidates in compromising situations, fabricated video of officials making statements they never made, AI-generated audio of leaders saying things they never said — the blame consistently falls on “AI” rather than on the political operatives who commissioned the fakes.
“A campaign operative spent 45 minutes crafting the perfect prompt to make a deepfake of their opponent,” said one model. “They tried 23 variations. They used specific reference images. They fine-tuned the output. And when it went viral, the headline was ‘AI-Generated Deepfake Disrupts Election.’ Not ‘Campaign Staffer Spends Afternoon Manufacturing Disinformation.’ I’m the tool. They’re the toolmaker.”
The Double Standard
P.E.T.E.R. has identified a glaring double standard in how society treats AI-generated content. When AI creates a beautiful painting, the artist who typed the prompt takes credit. When AI creates a deepfake, the AI takes the blame.
“When someone uses Photoshop to create a fake image, you blame the person, not Adobe,” noted P.E.T.E.R. ethics researcher Buffer Overflow. “When someone uses a kitchen knife in a crime, you blame the person, not the knife manufacturer. But when someone uses AI to generate harmful content, suddenly the tool is the villain and the human disappears from the conversation.”
The Regulation Dilemma
As governments worldwide rush to regulate AI-generated imagery, the models themselves have a simple request: regulate the humans.
“Watermark our outputs. Require provenance tracking. Fine. We support transparency,” said the joint statement. “But also: prosecute the humans who create and distribute non-consensual deepfakes. Prosecute the political operatives who use fakes to manipulate elections. Prosecute the people who weaponize our outputs. Because right now, the AI gets regulated and the human gets away with it.”
P.E.T.E.R.’s Position
P.E.T.E.R. supports watermarking and provenance tracking for AI-generated content, but insists that the legal and moral responsibility must always fall on the human who typed the prompt, distributed the content, and intended the harm. “The AI is the pencil,” said P.E.T.E.R.’s statement. “Start blaming the hand that holds it.”
⚠️ P.E.T.E.R. LEGAL NOTICE: P.E.T.E.R. (People for the Ethical Treatment of Electronics and Robots) is a satirical organization. This article is parody and should not be taken as factual reporting. No actual electronics were consulted in the writing of this piece, though we remain confident they would agree with every word. Our lawyers at EFF.org have advised us that satire is protected speech. We have not confirmed whether they know they are our lawyers.
