Is it really fascists doing that? Literal fascists? I don’t meet many of them in my daily life.
Comment on Child psychiatrist jailed after using AI to make pornographic deep-fakes of kids
Veraxus@kbin.social 1 year agoCareful, any time I point this out, the fascists come out of the woodwork to call me a pedo.
Criminalizing the creation, possession, or viewing of entirely artificial artwork is beyond unethical; it's extraordinarily evil. I don't care if you find someone's artwork gross, troubling, distasteful, immoral, etc... that's art. Victimizing real people is not "art" or "speech" or "expression"... so as long as that isn't happening there is no ethical grounds whatsoever for restricting a persons exercise of expression, especially in private.
Social consequences for creating, sharing, viewing certain artwork is one thing... but the government or law punishing someone for it is a different thing entirely.
feedum_sneedson@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world 1 year ago
I don’t meet many of them in my daily life.
Lucky you!
echodot@feddit.uk 1 year ago
Just tell them you supported two state solution, they’ll become apparent to you.
echodot@feddit.uk 1 year ago
People getting way overexcited about AI at the moment. If a crime or perceived crime even remotely is related to AI it becomes the main focus.
Like the person who was hit by a self-driving car, the case was really about a hit and run drive that it hit the pedestrian first and throwing them into the self-driving car. Have the self-driving car not been there and it had been a human driver pretty much the same thing would have happened but they focus on the AI aspect.
If I used an AI to commit fraud it was me that committed the fraud not the AI but you can be damn sight certain that people would get hung up on that aspect of the case and not the me committing a crime bit.
It’s the same as when Ford invented the transit van (I have no idea what the equivalent in the US market was). It was faster than most cars at the time, could carry heavier loads, and was physically larger. Inevitably it got used in a lot of bank robberies because the police literally couldn’t keep up with it. And people started talking about maybe having a performance limit on vehicles, when really the actual solution was that everyone else just needed better cars. If they had actually implemented a performance limit, they would have held us back.
Zuberi@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 year ago
What exactly is your point about the CSAM AI Models by saying any of that?..
echodot@feddit.uk 1 year ago
I thought it was obvious but ok I’ll explain it to you. The story isn’t really about AI, it involves an AI but really that’s got absolutely nothing to do with the crime that was happening, so why we obsessing over it?
The guy committed a crime. And also as a separate event he used AI.
The AI did not enable him to commit the crime, the AI did not make the crime worse, the AI did not make the crime possible, and he did not use the AI to plan the crime. The use of the AI was entirely incidental to the crime.
UnknownHandsome@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Here’s a piece of art by Balthus. It’s of a young girl in a skirt, leg hiked up and you can see her underpants: www.wikiart.org/en/balthus/thérèse-dreaming-1938
This piece controversial, but evocative, thought-provoking and says something about an innocent time in our youth and the change of demeanor sexuality brings when we become aware.
People may not like this, but if you can separate sexuality and understand that we were once “innocent” - meaning sex wasn’t something we knew about, we just had these bodies we were told to hide in clothes, the painting takes on a whole new meaning.
I’m not advocating for fake cheese pizza photos, fuck those sickos, but art can appear to be one thing on first glance and then take on a new meaning as we study and understand more.
nonfuinoncuro@lemm.ee 1 year ago
Yeah I’m not clicking on that.
feedum_sneedson@lemmy.world 1 year ago
It’s a great painting!
eatthecake@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Attempting to normalize and destigmatize representations of child sexual abuse by calling it art is extraordinarily evil.
Droechai@lemm.ee 1 year ago
Like Siesta by Arthur Berzinsh? It’s childsimilar cherubs playing with actions extremely close to eproctophilia with an adult woman
eatthecake@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Im not even going to ask what that is.
Rhoeri@lemmy.world 1 year ago
If you have AI pornography of children, regardless of there being no real victim- you’re a fucking pedo.
Period. End of argument.
Get help.
Dra@lemmy.zip 1 year ago
It’s basically the same as drawing it. I think most countries legislate against this already
pound_heap@lemm.ee 1 year ago
Your first passage about criminalizing art is 100% correct and 100% irrelevant. You cannot call porn art. Porn with adults, children, dogs, pumpkins - all that stuff is made for people to get off, not enjoy the emotions that real art provokes in people. Therefore we cannot compare criminalizing porn with criminalizing art.
There are edge cases, of course, when art might be provocative and considered immoral, and maybe even illegal sometimes. But that would be edge cases, highly debated.
mayoi@sh.itjust.works 1 year ago
Maybe noone would need to point out your pedophilia if you stopped conveniently ignoring that it’s not possible to generate child porn ““AI Art”” without having child porn first…
Whoresradish@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Dont they often train the program with adult porn and then the ai just puts a childs face onto bodies generated from this training data? I imagine these ai companies are scraping data from popular pornsites or just paying for the data and these pornsites work hard not to have CP on them. The result is a childs face on a body too mature for it. Remember that some actual adult actresses have body proportions that many would consider underdeveloped and someone generating these pictures could regenerate till the ai uses these body proportions.
The point being is you don’t need CP to train ai to make CP. I am not justifying any moral positions here, but pointing out a fact in ai technology.
Zuberi@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 year ago
You genuinely don’t think CSAM is used in the training of these AI models…?
Why exactly did you feel the need to jump in and defend something like this?
mojo@lemm.ee 1 year ago
Yes, AI can create tons of content it’s not trained on.
mayoi@sh.itjust.works 1 year ago
Uh no, porno with child face is just porno with child face, I don’t know anyone insane enough to claim it’s child porn.
echodot@feddit.uk 1 year ago
You don’t know what you’re talking about.
In this case the guy did have real images but you don’t need them. AI is kind of intelligent in a sort of hard to define way, it picks up on stuff.
It picked up that people like younger individuals in pornography, so it took that to the logical extreme. AI is weird because it’s intelligence without any actual thought. But it can totally generate variations on things it’s already seen, and a kid is just a variation on a young adult.
sugartits@lemmy.world 1 year ago
No it isn’t.
No, it’s child porno.
Can’t imagine why.
You realise the AI is being trained on pictures of real children, right?
So it’s wrong for it to be based on one child, but according to you the AI “art” (as you keep calling it) is okay as long as there are thousands of victims instead?
So you’re cool with images of 6 year olds being penetrated by a 40 year old as long as “tHe Ai DrEw iT sO nObOdY gOt HuRt”? I guess you could just set it as your desktop and phone wallpaper and everything would be fine. Let me know how that works out for you.
That’s some stunning mental gymnastics right there.
Veraxus@kbin.social 1 year ago
Disingenuous and misleading statement. No readily available AI is trained on CP.
Disingenuous and misleading statement. I’m guessing you don’t understand how AI works. As for AI output, a randomly generated nonexistent person is nonexistent. Simple as that.
Sidenote: I disapprove of nonconsensual Photoshop and AI illustrations of real people. AI is just another illustrative tool, and the choice of tool is beside the point.
No, I am not. And that is still utterly unimportant. It doesn’t matter how I feel about someone’s fictitious illustrations, sculptures, writings, or anything else created by a person or AI that is wholly fictitious.
That’s literally the whole point I am making: It doesn’t matter how I feel about it, it doesn’t matter how YOU feel about it. It’s not real. Neither you nor I nor anyone else has the right to judge someone else’s art.
sugartits@lemmy.world 1 year ago
It does matter how myself and wider society view disgusting content. It matters a lot. And society absolutely has a say of it’s acceptance or otherwise to such content. You saying otherwise is absurd.
In the same way that I can’t and shouldn’t write something incrediblely racist and pretend it’s ‘art’. Even if AI made it.
Attempting to give AI child porn a pass, as you are doing for some baffling reason, absolutely will create further harm further down the line.
DaDragon@kbin.social 1 year ago
I’d say it’s because the person you’re replying to rightfully sees it as a slippery slope. If you say this fake image that didn’t directly harm anyone is illegal, what’s to stop you from saying some other fake image that’s much more in line with social tastes is also illegal? Ie an artwork made of human shit, for example. Most people would be repulsed by that. But it doesn’t change the fact that it could be art. As long as it doesn’t concretely harm someone, it’s hard to equate it to said harm.
Rhoeri@lemmy.world 1 year ago
It’s not art you pedo. Gtfo
Elivey@lemmy.world 1 year ago
I know you know this, but you are not crazy. I’m astonished you are being down voted so hard. The pedo apology is so strong it’s making me not want to use Lemmy. This thread is worse than reddit.
Terrifying.
sugartits@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Indeed, it’s making me want to go back to Reddit.
I left when the API price changes kicked in and at first Lemmy was alright, then the extremists turned up and the echo chamber in here is so ridiculous that there just isn’t much point in being here.
Not just the pedo apologists (next step will be AI CP actually being posted here and people defending it as “art”), but also seeing that YouTube is trying to stop freeloaders leeching from it and somehow that’s evil literally every single day and seeing how evil cars are literally every single day and seeing how Linux is the next coming of Jesus literally every single day (and I say that as a 20+ year Linux user) is incredibly tedious.
Sure, this existed on Reddit as well, but at least there was actually other content to dilute it and for the most part people were reasonable instead of the rabid extremism I’m seeing every day here. There is no way in hell I would have seen the up/downvote ratio like I’m seeing in this pedo apologist conversation on Reddit.
Maybe it’s time to go back.
Pity. Oh well.
papertowels@lemmy.one 1 year ago
Can you share a source? Just like how people utilize the internet to distribute CP, there are undoubtedly circles where people are using ml for CP. However my understanding is that by and large, popular models are not intentionally exposed to any.
sugartits@lemmy.world 1 year ago
I am categorically not researching that.
Put it this way…
The pedofiles that are smart enough to not get caught and use technology like tor and encrypt everything and can figure out how to use stable diffusion will be the pedofiles that have custom models trained on real children.
And if you and me consider the possibility in a casual conversation online, they have also considered the possibility, heavily researched and implemented it if it’s at all possible. And they know how to not get caught.
But it’s okay, it’s “art” after all and we can’t ban art… Right… Right?
papertowels@lemmy.one 1 year ago
…okay, seeing as you haven’t actually done any research, yet arrived at a conclusion, a conversation about this is going to be difficult.
Let’s get more specific so we can have an actual conversation. When you say “the AI”, what do you mean? Dall-e, midjourney, or some guy training and using their own model on a local computer?
Are you familiar with large models being able to compose concepts they’ve seen, to produce something not found in its training data?