Much as all in modern AI - it’s able to train without much human intervention.
My point is, even if results are not perfectly accurate and resembling a child’s body, they work. They are widely used, in fact, so widely that Europol made a giant issue out of it. People get off to whatever it manages to produce, and that’s what matters.
I do not care about how accurate it is, because it’s not me who consumes this content. I care about how efficient it is at curbing worse desires in pedophiles, because I care about safety of children.
TheRealKuni@midwest.social 2 days ago
It wasn’t trained to produce every specific image it produces. That would make it pointless. It “learns” concepts and then applies them.
No one trained AI on material of Donald Trump sucking on feet, but it can still generate it.
DoPeopleLookHere@sh.itjust.works 2 days ago
It was able to produce that because enough images of both feet and Donald Trump exist.
How would it know what young genitals look like?
JuxtaposedJaguar@lemmy.ml 2 days ago
If you train a model on 1,000,000 images of dogs and 1,000,000 images of cats, your output isn’t going to be a 50/50 split of purely dogs and purely cats, it’s going to be (on average) somewhere between a cat and a dog. At no point did you have to feed in pictures of dog-cat hybrids to end up with that model.
DoPeopleLookHere@sh.itjust.works 2 days ago
Yes but you start with the basics of a cat and a dog. So you start with adult genitals and…
JuxtaposedJaguar@lemmy.ml 2 days ago
You could probably make some semi-realistic drawings and feed those in, and then re-train the model with those same images over and over until the model is biased to use the child-like properties of the drawings but the realism of the adult pictures. You could also feed the most CP-looking images from a partially trained model as the training data of another model, which over time would make the outputs approach the desired result.
DoPeopleLookHere@sh.itjust.works 2 days ago
But to know if it’s accurate, someone has to view and compare…