When it's trivially easy to break the law and there are no obvious victims, and it can be done on computers, those rules go out the window.
Almost everyone who shared music on Napster would have never shoplifted a CD from a record store. Almost everyone who shares TV episodes on Bittorrent would never have stolen a DVD from a store or climbed up a power pole to illegally tap into cable.
Your single counter example is "people do media piracy". I personally do torrent media, and I'm pretty clear eyed that I do it because there are no negative consequences for me. It has nothing to do with computers or victims. There's no enforcement. If ISPs started fining people or cutting off access for pirating media I would stop because those consequences are worse than the benefit I get.
Who benefits from making deepfakes, and how do we respond to them? By simply throwing our hands up in the air and upvoting you're encouraging this behaviour by normalizing it. If people recognize it as deception that violates consent it will be discouraged.
When it becomes trivial to 3d print gray goo (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gray_goo) I wonder if you'll sing the same tune to humanity's destruction or if you'd admit that there's a spectrum and there's some threshold past which a technology becomes condemnable. Because right now your statement basically implies there is no such threshold (since clearly the person you're replying to thinks podcast.ai is past it).
