Unpopular opinion:
There are actions that are illegal. Recordings of those actions is illegal. Generated material counts as art. Also movies count as art. If those show an illegal action, it is not illegal. It is art. And should be protected, whether you like it or not. Same category as freedom of speech.
How does intent play into this?
Personal, unprofessional opinion: it plays a huge role, when it comes to a possible sentencing. Judges value factors such as intent and remorse, to adjust the sentences. However, it has to come to a case first and for that, something legally questionable has to happen. We are at the stage, where it is probably only morally questionable, but not legally.
If fake babies roasting in ovens was a bad thing, how come The Sims never got cancelled? 🤔
SIGNIFICANTLY less realistic
Only someone who regularly roasts babies on the barbie would know this 😉
Is a video of a baby roasting in an oven even illegal? In general, are videos of violent crime illegal?
i think the point isn’t that they should have to take it down but that they should take it down. not taking it down is a choice.
What? How? I mean… there are quite a lot of violent and graphic movies out there. So this should not be illegal. However, it has to be made sure that those videos cannot be seen by non-adults.
children watched beheading videos all the time and tutned out fine, why would this slop be any different?
Well, I know what you are trying to say, you just put it in a very extreme way. This is like saying that there are smokers who are 90yo, so it must be not affecting your health. A skewed view, because you don’t see the affected people, because they are six feet under. Same with traumatized people, who choose suicide because of all their experiences.
A bit of survivorship bias never hurt anyone that survived
Oh right, that was the term. Thanks for reminding me 😄
This. People reaaaaally don’t like that point, but video/fictional stuff should not be held to the same standard as actual, living people. Otherwise, we can kiss goodbye to 90% of the entertainment business. Movies, books, video games, pictures, all of those should be allowed to depict stuff, if only to criticize it.
Unfortunately, too many people think that if they don’t want to see something, no media of it should exist.
It would be very different if actual people were used, or even just their likeness, because then it actually can cause harm and distress. But this? People wasting their time defending pixels are doing only one thing: not defending actual people.
And where do you draw the line?
For example, do you think CSAM should be legal as long as those in the material are fictional?
If you think that is not okay, would it make a difference to you if those in the material were not “realistic” (but still underage)?
I don’t think people are suggesting it should be illegal because they personally don’t want to see it, but rather because they believe that it is damaging to society as a whole.
drawn pornographic depcitions are generally legal and protected by the first amendment in the united states, even if the artist explicitly states the characters are minors.
video/fictional stuff should not be held to the same standard as actual, living people.
Disagree.
Loads of countries treat animations or computer generated images the same as photos.
No one is “defending pixels”. The actual reasons are that the abuse of children should not be normalised, that authorities should not have to identify a specific victim, and that no legitimate artistic interest is served.
That said, the question of whether a child in an oven depicts child abuse according to the interpretation of the court is another question entirely, and I suspect that the answer is that it does not. Yes placing a child in an oven would be abusive, no an image of a child in an oven is not “child abuse material”.
Otherwise, we can kiss goodbye to 90% of the entertainment business.
Preposterous.
I don’t think that was the point of the comment you replied to.
The point is that even if it was a real video, it’s not illegal. Just like a video of 9/11 is not a terrorist attack nor is it illegal, it’s just a video of one.
I’m so mad that ai generated objectionable material is considered fine because it isnt illegal but someone draws a werewolf with its dick out and it gets removed for “promoting beastiality”
Source: involved in a lot of NSFW furry artist communities and constantly see peoples work being removed, flagged, or accounts lost for less.
Ah but you see, when something is hot it makes closeted conservatives uncomfortable.
You see the problem? To a conservative, nothing is more illegal than making them personally uncomfortable. And nobody is more inherently conservative than a billionaire media mogul.
Yeah tbh, they shouldn’t have to take that down. It’s the least of the bad shit they’re doing, and showing fake violence is just in poor taste.
It’s in their rule that if it’s too graphic then they might take it down. Emphasise on “might”, it’s very arbitrary, and they take down content for less.
Inb4 “it’s AI generated it’s okay” that mean AI generated child porn is okay as well.
I would argue AI generated child porn is better than the alternative, perhaps if it was legal it would give people an option that causes no harm
And where would the genAI get its training data from?
I mean, it would help satiate the pervert(who just wanna look), but it will not make the actual rapist(who want the action, for the lack of better word) to stop, and CSAM is provided by the latter. I don’t see why using genAI CSAM to satiate the former would solve much of the issue, the former will just watch adult porn if there’s no child porn. On the other hand it’s not like there’s a lack of loli hentai.
And the abundance of online pornography explains why people don’t rape people any more.
There are actually studies showing that better access to pornography correlates with fewer sexual assaults.
This one for example.
That has been legal far longer than Gen AI has existed, we don’t know how much of an effect it has on crime stats but I am sure there less rape now than there has ever been
If cutting 100% of crime is the only time doing something is worth it then no laws would exist
OK, how about another angle. If you make AI CSAM a thing, you’ve given basically anybody in possession of real CSAM an out. Also, presumably real CSAM is still illegal, so the difference between a pat on the back and serious prison time is whether some poor jury thinks the 8 year old rape victim in the video looks real enough.
Get out of here with this shit. It’s gross.
A lot of movies would be illegal, if that was the case.
No but it’s probably against their ToS so I don’t know why an AI generated gore video gets a pass.
The only footage that’s illegal from what I understand are sexual assault videos (including obviously csam) and snuff films (which are different because they are specifically made for distribution and generating revenue compared to “accidental” gore films)
Depends where you are as well and this is mostly from memory.
If they don’t care, make them care. That’s what courts are for: make criminals feel the law.
Or just make them care by making a bunch of gross videos about Zuckerberg and the entire Meta board members.
Yes, censor all the things we find distasteful! Burn the books, delete the disks!!!
The U.S. courts? I wouldn’t hold your breath.
Holy shit y’all love censorship. Puritan shit here but it’s okay cause you hate ai 🤣.
Fun fact: I don’t care about Meta. Fuck them.
Meta has hundreds of billions to chase superintelligence, but apparently can’t figure out how to remove AI videos depicting child abuse, even when journalists hand over the accounts. Facebook’s recommendation algorithm can find this content effortlessly. Shame the moderation team apparently can’t.
They also have the energy to ban queer users and deadname indigenous folks
Can’t or won’t? They’re pretty good and removing women’s health information and other things fascists want them to.
I’m sure the Trump regime will charge a large tech company with crimes any day now. \s
