this post was submitted on 08 Oct 2024
352 points (91.3% liked)
Technology
59389 readers
3688 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The problem with AI generated CP is that if they're legal, it opens a new line of defense for actual CP. You would need to prove the content is not AI to convince real abusers. This is why it can't be made legal, it needs to be prosecuted like real CP to be sure to convict actual abusers.
This is an incredibly itchy and complicated theme. So I will try not go go really further into it.
But prosecute what is essentially a work of fiction seems bad.
This it not even a topic new to the AI. CP has been wildly represented in both written and graphical media. And the consensus in most free countries is not to prosecute those as they are a work of fiction.
I cannot think why an AI written CP fiction is different from human written CP fiction.
I suppose "AI big bad" justify it for some. But for me there should be a logical explanation behind if we would began to prosecute works of fiction why some will be prosecuted and why other will not. Specially when the one that's being prosecuted is just regurgitating the human written stories about CP that are not being prosecuted nowadays.
I essentially think that a work of fiction should never be prosecuted to begin with, no matter the topic. And I also think that an AI writing about CP is no worse than an actual human doing the same thing.
I'm not claiming it's legally simple but the difference is that this new "fiction" is very hard, if not impossible to distinguish from reality. Nowadays AI can form a regular human hand.
I'm unfamiliar with the exact situation here, but when it comes to generative AI as I understand it, CP image output also means CP images in the training data.
That may not strictly be true, but it is certainly worth investigating at minimum.
Common misconception. AI can take an image of a child and an image of a naked woman and produce an image of a naked child (who does not resemble either the child or the woman). There's no need for actual CP in the dataset.