this post was submitted on 20 Jun 2023
7 points (100.0% liked)

World News

38972 readers
1905 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

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.

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 [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://vlemmy.net/post/153082

Disclaimer: No images are used in the article.

top 24 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

"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

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

sort of surprised it's 80% - but if there's no law against it...

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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."

[–] [email protected] -3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Right. Except these models were trained on something.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Thats pretty fucking dumb considering it normalizes the idea of sexualizing children. Are policymakers really oblivious to how that will go?

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago

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.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago

"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.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (5 children)

I am not saying that this is a good thing, but rather generated by AI than the real thing... Still fuckedup though.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

It's equally illegal, at least in my country.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

...how did they train the model though?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

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

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That’s a hell of a leap and seems to be based in ignorance of the technology.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

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.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago

Access to pornography lowers incidence of sexual assault

So it very much looks to be the other way around

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

You’ll still go to jail, even if it is fake, even if it is a cartoon character.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

The bart simpson porn case I think was UK.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago

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)