Child psychiatrist jailed after using AI to make pornographic deep-fakes of kids

Comments

• Thalion@lemmy.ca ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Pretty sure the actual CP played a bigger role in the sentencing

  source

  • 0110010001100010@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Yeah this is a scary, clickbaity headline meant to invoke a negative response about AI. AI is a tool, like a computer or pipe wrench. It can be used for good or bad.

    The sicko got what he deserved, but the AI bit is rather over-the-top.

    source

    • livus@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      The part that freaks me out is more that he was in an influential position in children's lives and he was making images of the specific children who were his patients.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • mjhelto@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Username totally checks out. Definitely not AI or a bot.

      source
  • Destraight@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    CP? What does that mean?

    source

    • dabaldeagul@feddit.nl ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Child pornography.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
  • Ziglin@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    How come you are already using a short form, how often do you talk about this kind of thing???

    source

    • Nfamwap@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Its pretty well established what CP stands for.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
• Infiltrated_ad8271@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  In this case there are several crimes, but in the other one mentioned about a korean there is nothing, only possession of generated content arguing that there is high realism (someone could say the same even of a sketch). To imprison for acts that have neither victims nor any harm either directly or indirectly, is more aberrant than possessing that.

  PS: I'm just talking about legality and rights, I know it's controversial and I'm sure someone has something to argue against it, but if you're going to accuse me of being a pedo just get lost you moron.

  source

  • Veraxus@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Careful, 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.

    source

    • sugartits@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Criminalizing the creation, possession, or viewing of entirely artificial artwork is beyond unethical; it’s extraordinarily evil.

      No it isn’t.

      I don’t care if you find someone’s artwork gross, troubling, distasteful, immoral, etc… that’s art.

      No, it’s child porno.

      Careful, any time I point this out, the fascists come out of the woodwork to call me a pedo.

      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.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • feedum_sneedson@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Is it really fascists doing that? Literal fascists? I don’t meet many of them in my daily life.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • 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.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • 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.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • eatthecake@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Attempting to normalize and destigmatize representations of child sexual abuse by calling it art is extraordinarily evil.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • 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.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • 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.

      source
    • 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…

      source

      • -> View More Comments
  • cactusupyourbutt@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    I agree with what you are saying.

    however, I think psychologists might not be a fan of giving them access to that material. I think the reason is because they would end up looking fore more and more extreme material and they could end up offending as a result of that

    source

    • Sanyanov@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Afaik we’re still yet to find out whether viewing AI-generated material makes an individual look for real-life child abuse imagery. I believe viewing the latter allows many to keep real-life urges under control, but it obviously comes with its own issues. If we can make AI generated child pornography, and if it doesn’t make people go look for the “real stuff”, we might actually make a very positive impact on child safety.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
• BigMacHole@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  They should become a Republican speaker. Then they’ll get a TON of support from the Protect The Children crowd!

  source

  • FaeDrifter@midwest.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Or a pastor so the church can relocate them to a fresh batch of victims.

    source
• ARk@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  why the FUCK

  source

  • HikingVet@lemmy.ca ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Pedos are gonna pedo.

    source
• Zuberi@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Wtaf are these comments.

  Go home you sick fucks.

  source

  • Elivey@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    It’s worse than reddit up in here. At least the psychos calling AI CP “art” would be met with comments that would be upvoted even more, not down voted into the negatives.

    source

    • Rhoeri@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      I e been reporting them. That shit can go back to Reddit where it’s encouraged.

      source
    • Zuberi@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      The lemmy.world instance is a strong proponent of this vibe I’ve found.

      source
  • Donjuanme@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Pandora’s box has been opened.

    source
  • Snowpix@lemmy.ca ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Disgusting to know just how many people are sad, disgusting pieces of shit. CSAM is CSAM, virtual or real. The distinction does not matter.

    source
• mayoi@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Why does the title focus on AI? It looks more like advertisement for AI that can produce porn than the fact that a psychiatrist got photos of naked children under their care…

  source

  • papertowels@lemmy.one ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Just chipping in with a technicical answer - a model can know what thing A is, also be shown a thing B, and compose the two. Otherwise models would never be able to display anything that doesn’t exist yet.

    In this particular case, there’s stock imagery of children online, and there’s naked adults online, so a model can combine the two.

    source

    • mayoi@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Models already cannot display anything that doesn’t exist yet.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
• Zuberi@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Blocking any/all users of the “it’s just art” and the “no kids were actually used so it’s not child pornography” crowds.

  Christ, the comments just kept getting worse.

  source

  • Pxtl@lemmy.ca ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    I mean for people that are providing a moral defense of this? Yeah, no, fuck them into the sun.

    But from a legal perspective, that’s kind of the problem isn’t it? Because no kids are involved, this creates a huge legal question - isn’t this constitutionally protected in countries that have Freedom of Expression/Speech?

    I mean this is obviously vile and this person is a danger to children… but would this be illegal in the USA and Canada and other countries that have freedoms that make it very difficult to prosecute this kind of speech?

    There’s also the wrinkle that it’s being made of real people. Not just that it’s kids in general, but real, actual, specific kids. Most countries have some form of “use of likeness” protections, but that’s essentially making this into a copyright dispute, and a pretty grey one at that.

    source

    • jagungal@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Not sure what laws the states or Canada have, but it’s considered child pornography if it’s a depiction of CSA, regardless of whether it’s an adult acting, or cartoons, or AI. I suspect at least some states in the US have similar laws.

      source
    • Thranduil@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      I dont mind loli hentai but thats as far as im ok with the moment it looks real its a problem imo.

      source
  • anarchy79@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    That’s an extremely limited take on it that I would expect from Sunday rags. “I have made up my mind, and since I decide, I will simply make sure that nobody gets to discuss this.”

    Thanks, reddit, can you fuck off back there now?

    source

    • Elivey@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Sorry we’re not interested in discussing child pornography as art, because we’re not disgusting pedophile apologists.

      We aren’t making sure no one discusses this, you can have your nuanced discussions about child pornography with other pedophiles and pedo apologists, you won’t be having it with us.

      source
• KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Jesus fuck

  source
• autotldr@lemmings.world [bot] ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  This is the best summary I could come up with:

  ---

  “As a child psychiatrist, Tatum knew the damaging, long-lasting impact sexual exploitation has on the wellbeing of victimized children,” said US Attorney Dena J.

  The trial evidence cited by the government includes a secretly-made recording of a minor (a cousin) undressing and showering, and other videos of children participating in sex acts.

  “Additionally, trial evidence also established that Tatum used AI to digitally alter clothed images of minors making them sexually explicit,” prosecutors said.

  “Specifically, trial evidence showed that Tatum used a web-based artificial intelligence application to alter images of clothed minors into child pornography.”

  In prepared remarks [PDF] delivered at a US Senate subcommittee hearing earlier this year, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman said, "GPT-4 is 82 percent less likely to respond to requests for disallowed content compared to GPT-3.5, and we use a robust combination of human and automated review processes to monitor for misuse.

  A recent report from investigative organization Balkan Insight says groups like Thorn have been supporting CSAM detection legislation to make online content scanning compulsory in part because they provide that service.

  ---

  The original article contains 457 words, the summary contains 177 words. Saved 61%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

  source

  • Mojojojo1993@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Would be good if we could use this for porn. It’s better than anyone actually being in porn. If AI takes over then less people would be trafficked and in the porn industry

    source

    • Tb0n3@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Implying nobody enjoys making porn.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • UnculturedSwine@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      What would help with sex trafficking legalizing and regulating prostitution and destigmatizing it.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • piracy_is_good_xdd@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      [deleted]

      source

      • -> View More Comments
• TransplantedSconie@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  I look forward to the inevitable news story about an inmate crushing his skull with an exercise weight.

  source

  • echodot@feddit.uk ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Yeah but they won’t report on that.

    source
• HexesofVexes@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  A bit sensationalist there - article states he’d videoed minors in sexual acts. Probably what got him his well deserved prison stint.

  Though I must say, the AI part alone should be enough to rule him out of a career around kids!

  source

  • some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    I missed that paragraph when I skimmed the article. Thanks!

    The trial evidence cited by the government includes a secretly-made recording of a minor (a cousin) undressing and showering, and other videos of children participating in sex acts.

    source