• DaDragon@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    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.

    • sugartits@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s child porn.

      Child. Pornography.

      It is not “Art”.

      The slippery slope is people like you confusing the two and trying to somehow justify CP as free speech/art.

      I don’t care how it is made. There is a line. This crosses it. Simple as that.

        • Zuberi 👀@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          10
          ·
          1 year ago

          You genuinely don’t think CSAM is used in the training of these AI models…?

          Why did you feel the need to jump in and defend stuff like this?

          • Whoresradish@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            I am a software engineer and you are misrepresenting the technology. All the articles I can find state it was a web based ai generator but not which one. Please find me a company that makes this tech public and is somehow not in trouble but should be or is in trouble.

            “That same year, Tatum surreptitiously recorded one of his New York patients during an outpatient visit, five days after the youth turned 18.”

            “Two of the images Tatum used AI to modify were from a school dance”

            https://news.yahoo.com/charlotte-child-psychiatrist-used-ai-232015715.html

            The above quotes indicate it may have been used on an older child which could easily be done with legal training data. Please find any evidence that any public ai image generator is stupid enough to use CP when they are risking millions of dollars and would have to keep a lot of employees quiet about it.

          • papertowels@lemmy.one
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Oh Jesus are you really just copy and pasting this reply to everyone that explains how machine learning works?

        • mayoi@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          11
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Proof? Show me a model that can do this.

          Go on, prove to me that we have mystery meat technology that can produce free-range natural child porn where 0 children were harmed in the making.