6
"Roughly 80 percent of respondents" to a poll posted in a dark web forum with 3,000 members said that "they had used or intended to use AI tools to create child sexual abuse images,"
wtf
sort of surprised it's 80% - but if there's no law against it...
There are laws against it in the US.
From the article:
Two officials from the US Justice Department’s Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section told The Washington Post that AI-generated images depicting "minors engaged in sexually explicit conduct" are illegal under at least two US laws.
One law "makes it illegal for any person to knowingly produce, distribute, receive, or possess with intent to transfer or distribute visual representations, such as drawings, cartoons, or paintings that appear to depict minors engaged in sexually explicit conduct and are deemed obscene." The other law "defines child pornography as any visual depiction of sexually explicit conduct involving a minor," including "computer-generated images indistinguishable from an actual minor."
Similar laws have been struck down by the Supreme Court in the past under the argument that if no children are being harmed (ie, these aren't pictures of actual children), then there is no basis for the government to restrict creation and possession of the images.
Thats pretty fucking dumb considering it normalizes the idea of sexualizing children. Are policymakers really oblivious to how that will go?
Does video game violence normalize regular violence? Are people playing violent video games going out and harming people.
Can’t believe this argument is still being used in 2023.
Right. Except these models were trained on something.
I don't think that number means anything. The way it's phrased it's 80% of some unknown percentage of 3000 users, so could be 5 people responded, one that is an actual pedo said 'yes', one that is an actual pedo said 'no', and the rest just said 'yes' to be edgy.
"In a dark web forum" - presumably not a forum about baking, manufacturing meth or pirating movies. In other words, they probably created the poll in a forum at least related to that kind of material/activity.
I am not saying that this is a good thing, but rather generated by AI than the real thing... Still fuckedup though.
It's equally illegal, at least in my country.
Its still fucked up, because it starts with shit like this before moving into real world encounters. Over time the predators brain will see it as a new normal and will want to escalate.
Do you know this or do you think this? I'm relieved I don't have much insight into the mind of pedos... But couldn't it be the other way around too?
Access to pornography lowers incidence of sexual assault
So it very much looks to be the other way around
...how did they train the model though?
Not (necessarily) with real naked children. With kids with clothes, adults with clothes, and naked adults.
It's not hard for the AI to transpose from a clothed child to a naked one, it's basically the same thing as switching your gender or making you look old
You’ll still go to jail, even if it is fake, even if it is a cartoon character.
US defaultism
The bart simpson porn case I think was UK.
Depends on the country. Some only criminalize depictions where children were exploited or harmed, so the cartoon stuff might get a pass despite being nasty. AI images I'd imagine it might be hard to prove they aren't real children and at that point might be treated like a robbery with a fake weapon or selling fake drugs (still chargeable as the real thing in most places)
The really sick aspect about this is that someone fed the AI with probably thousands of real child porn images to generate the fake ones.
That’s a hell of a leap and seems to be based in ignorance of the technology.
Your comment is based in ignorance of the technology. To have AI spit out images of a specific type, you also have to first feed it imagines of said type.
Again, you’re obviously ignorant of how this stuff actually works. That is simply not the case. Otherwise the training set would necessarily need to have images of every type that you hope to generate, an impossibility and which obviously isn’t the case - a very quick look at some of the crazier things people have generated disprove it. Training the model on nude and clothed images of adults and clothed images of children - as others have pointed out - would allow you to generate nude images of children. Could a model have been fine tuned with CSAM - yes; but it’s certainly not a given, and probably not necessary.
The stable diffusion sub has somewhat migrated over to the fediverse. You can find more information about how this stuff actually works beyond your introductory understanding of the concept there.
this post was submitted on 20 Jun 2023
6 points (100.0% liked)
World News
38978 readers
1409 users here now
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS