9 ms·

He said: “If they are caught actively searching for this, they will have no more of a defence than someone that’s doing it because they want to find it for thei

He said: “If they are caught actively searching for this, they will have no more of a defence than someone that’s doing it because they want to find it for their own gratification. It is not a defence in court going looking for this.” I wonder, with the rise of deep fakes and CGI, why a company hasn't come up with a business model offering professional rendered synthetic child pornography. It seems to me that there would be demand for it, and if an ethically un-encumbered product is indistinguishable from the real thing, much of the demand of child sexual abuse imagery would evaporate.

getoffmyawn 6y ago
> I wonder, with the rise of deep fakes and CGI, why a company hasn't come up with a business model offering professional rendered synthetic child pornography. It seems to me that there would be demand for it, and if an ethically un-encumbered product is indistinguishable from the real thing, much of the demand of child sexual abuse imagery would evaporate. I suppose law enforcement could use it in sting operations. but if it proliferates wouldn't it still be illegal otherwise? seems legally and morally fishy to me.
- briandear 6y ago
  Even animated child porn is illegal because the theory goes, it drives demand for the real thing. Someone who flies flight simulators eventually would welcome the chance in a real airplane. Besides, getting off on children sexually is beyond reprehensible. If we are to have any laws at all, I vote for the one that doesn’t encourage or support exploiting children, real or otherwise.
  - risho 6y ago
    >Even animated child porn is illegal because the theory goes, it drives demand for the real thing. Someone who flies flight simulators eventually would welcome the chance in a real airplane. And people who play Grand Theft Auto inevitably go out and run over hookers with their car or seek out videos where such things happen in real life. Oh wait...
    - gamblor956 6y ago
      In this case there is a lot of research on this specific point demonstrating that consumption of CP drives and even induces demand in pedophiles. So it's nothing at all like playing GTA.
      - buisi 6y ago
        What research? The research with correlations that people who look at that are statistically more likely to do things? Sure. If you take a sample of people with absolutely no interest and a sample with people who do have interest you would find the sample with interest would be more likely to attack someone. Does the consumption of CP drive the desire or does the desire lead to the consumption and subsequent unwanted behavior in some people? Is punishing people for their desires and driving them underground really helpful? All to sate our sense of disgust? Is this even compatible with due process? Ideally, you would advance technology such as to make artificial alternatives indistinguishable from reality and produce robots. Or whatever it takes. Disgusting? Sure. But, it is better than the alternative and it preserves the high standards we set for our liberal democracy. You keep out of other people's business and they keep out of yours. No one tells you how to live your life, so long as you don't bother them.
      - throw149102 6y ago
        I have no idea how a researcher is supposed to show that CP induces demand in pedophiles without running into some pretty massive fundamental issues. There are already troubles getting people to admit who they're going to vote for anonymously, so getting people to admit that they are using child pornography anonymously seems like an extremely tall task. I've also seen studies trying to show the opposite, or trying to show that there is no causation either way, so I don't think there is anything resembling a consensus on this issue at all.
      - claudiawerner 6y ago
        >So it's nothing at all like playing GTA. It probably is at least somewhat. Violent video games have also been shown to increase feelings of aggression in lab settings and in some cases even foster sexist attitudes. I mentioned this to you in another comment, but Gary Young's The Gamer's Dilemma book is a very good book-length treatment on the issue of virtual violence vs "virtual pedophilia".
  - buisi 6y ago
    Another theory goes that people who attack children would have done it either way. You punish the innocent for the crimes of someone else.
  - manfredo 6y ago
    > Even animated child porn is illegal because the theory goes, it drives demand for the real thing. Not in the US it isn't.
  - happytoexplain 6y ago
    One of the easiest ways to fall into medieval behavior is to convince yourself that the property of being reprehensible, or disgusting, plays any part, even small, in "deserving" to suffer punishment by the state. It's the antithesis of civilization, and a dire evil.
  - claudiawerner 6y ago
    >I vote for the one that doesn’t encourage or support exploiting children, real or otherwise. Forgive me if I'm interpreting this incorrectly, but are you really saying that you'd vote for a law (which, usually means prison time) for people who 'exploit' non-real children? You need to go into more detail as to your definition of exploitation, or clarify what you mean by 'real or otherwise'.
dleslie 6y ago
Here in Canada that would still be child pornography. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_pornography_laws_in_Canada https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_pornography_laws_in_Ca...
- Teever 6y ago
  The law in Canada regarding child pornography is so broad that a depiction including stick figures having sex with an arrow pointing to it and the caption "children having sex for my gratification" would count as child pornography.
  - dleslie 6y ago
    Canada has both juries and common law; I can't imagine a conviction for something so lacking in obvious criminal intent.
    - nmz 6y ago
      It all depends on how outraged the populace is about the subject matter. criminal intent is secondary.
      - dleslie 6y ago
        Canada has the rule of law, not the mob, and protected expression. Relevant: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_v_Sharpe https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_v_Sharpe
      - buisi 6y ago
        This is true. Some countries allow less realistic content but not more realistic content despite it being a wholly arbitrary differentiation. Many filters censor all of it, regardless of legality and boast 99% abuse detection rates with a low false positive rate. Some filters only the more realistic content. Realistic content does admittedly have a problem where it may become difficult for a human to differentiate it from unlawful content. Although in that particular case, it is hoped it would end up competing with unlawful content and drive demand for it down. People with some degree of awareness to the children harmed to produce the content will not want to contribute to it when there are other avenues which are virtually indistinguishable. It may be possible to do outreach in legal outlets to raise awareness of harms or provide resources to prevent them from committing serious crime.
DavidVoid 6y ago
The deep-fake has to be trained on something. Would it really be ethically un-encumbered if the fake videos were created by a NN trained on images/videos of real children?
- mlindner 6y ago
  What if you train the NN using data generated from a NN that was trained on images/videos of real children? Alternatively, how many layers down do you have to go of NNs training other NNs before it's ethically okay? If your answer is "infinite" then that is the ethical equivalent of homeopathy where a solution of a bunch of random chemicals is diluted to the point that there is 0% of the original left in the sold product. Interesting question.
  - reitzensteinm 6y ago
    It's not homeopathy because you're not diluting it by mixing ethical inputs, you're just doing a bad job of training from a wholely unethical source. It's all fruit of a poisoned tree.
    - lilboiluvr69 6y ago
      Law enforcement has been known to continue running seized child pornography sites in order to collect data on the user-base, the justification being that overall rates of viewing child pornography are reduced through additional arrests. It's an difficult ethical dilemma. How are we categorizing the harm done to victims of child pornography? Is it based on how many different people see the same image or just the number of times the images was viewed in general? Obviously the victim isn't getting some sort of electric shock every time somebody sees the image. Do we include it additional harm if the identifying features of the child in question are unavailable? What if the victim doesn't know they were part of the training model or that there are even images of them on the Internet? Would it be ethical if training data from children in non-pornographic situations was used? What if somebody had child pornography made of them but allow their image to be used (donated?) after they were 18? I'm not claiming to know the answers.
shota123456 6y ago
Cartoons are already illegal and how the hell are you going to defend this in court? Just because its completely "innocent" and absolutely zero child are harmed, its still illegal.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- gruez 6y ago
  >Cartoons are already illegal depends on the jurisdiction. at least in the us they're not illegal per se. > U.S. law distinguishes between pornographic images of an actual minor, realistic images that are not of an actual minor, and non-realistic images such as drawings. The latter two categories are legally protected unless found to be obscene, whereas the first does not require a finding of obscenity.
  - 236dev 6y ago
    I had to see for my social media website (similar to tumblr) (tiblar.com) if it was legal or not. At least in Delaware lolicon/shotacon and cartoon child porn is illegal. It varies on which state it is, some states it is legal, others it is not. Federally it is legal.
    - manfredo 6y ago
      The Supreme Court has repeatedly struck down state laws banning fake child porn. Since the 2010s a few people have been convicted for it, but only alongside convictions of real images. They probably saw no point in appealing if the other charges would stick. States have obscenity laws that restrict sale and advertisement of this content, but possession cannot be banned by obscenity laws. Think about the mess that would be enforcing this law. You can't objectively determine the age of a fake character, unlike a real person.
      - somebodythere 6y ago
        > Think about the mess that would be enforcing this law. You can't objectively determine the age of a fake character, unlike a real person. It is certainly a mess, but that doesn't stop jurisdictions outside the United States from prosecuting it.
ozten 6y ago
People who consume child pornography have severe mental health issues. They need counseling and treatment. This idea is not what they need and is repugnant. Also, who in their right mind would build, QA, or market such a soul crushing product. Some Taboos will remain Taboos despite “hurting no one”.
- hnaccy 6y ago
  What if it reduced the rates of actual sex crimes against children? https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/11/101130111326.htm https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/11/101130111326.h...
  - ozten 6y ago
    Thanks for sharing this research! My hunch is that it is a local optimization. Perhaps if we focused on de-stigmatizing mental health issues and making access to mental health care easier, that could also reduce rates. It is a universal and much less problematic strategy.
    - Retric 6y ago
      That reads like you are simply ignoring any information you disagree with. For the sake of argument let’s assume it’s the best possible option on any scale you choose, now what do you feel should be done?
  - claudiawerner 6y ago
    It's worth noting that the authors here do not claim that it reduced rates, only that it coincided with such a reduction, i.e that the material did not cause an increase in child sex crimes. The catharsis effect has very little empirical support. As such, this paper does dispute the argument that porn leads to higher rates of sexual assault. It does not provide evidence for porn being an outlet that prevents crimes. The distinction is important.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
buisi 6y ago
Public outrage. Legality in some jurisdictions. Chance of employees getting harassed.
throwaway513208 6y ago
Sex bots are after that. Westworld asks "If you can't tell, does it matter?"
- throwaw4y-plate 6y ago
  These violent delights have violent ends
codezero 6y ago
Computer generated images of children in sexual situations are illegal in a lot of countries, and any country a company like this started to operate in would start to legislate once people make noise.
navjack27 6y ago
Daz3D exists. That has models of all ages for character rendering. Third parties have add-ons for models. This is a thing and has been for ages. Poser is another character rendering program.
goatinaboat 6y ago
much of the demand of child sexual abuse imagery would evaporate. It would not. Sexual crimes are not (only) about sex, they are about exercising power over a victim. Downloading real images of abuse is driven by exercising that power vicariously. If anything images like those you suggest would only fuel demand for the "real thing".
ummonk 6y ago
Or hire dwarf actors.
- buisi 6y ago
  It would have to be a dwarf who looks like a child in features not merely stature.
  - ummonk 6y ago
    Yes, some forms of dwarfism cause that.

getoffmyawn 6y ago

> I wonder, with the rise of deep fakes and CGI, why a company hasn't come up with a business model offering professional rendered synthetic child pornography. It seems to me that there would be demand for it, and if an ethically un-encumbered product is indistinguishable from the real thing, much of the demand of child sexual abuse imagery would evaporate. I suppose law enforcement could use it in sting operations. but if it proliferates wouldn't it still be illegal otherwise? seems legally and morally fishy to me.

briandear 6y ago
Even animated child porn is illegal because the theory goes, it drives demand for the real thing. Someone who flies flight simulators eventually would welcome the chance in a real airplane. Besides, getting off on children sexually is beyond reprehensible. If we are to have any laws at all, I vote for the one that doesn’t encourage or support exploiting children, real or otherwise.
- risho 6y ago
  >Even animated child porn is illegal because the theory goes, it drives demand for the real thing. Someone who flies flight simulators eventually would welcome the chance in a real airplane. And people who play Grand Theft Auto inevitably go out and run over hookers with their car or seek out videos where such things happen in real life. Oh wait...
  - gamblor956 6y ago
    In this case there is a lot of research on this specific point demonstrating that consumption of CP drives and even induces demand in pedophiles. So it's nothing at all like playing GTA.
    - buisi 6y ago
      What research? The research with correlations that people who look at that are statistically more likely to do things? Sure. If you take a sample of people with absolutely no interest and a sample with people who do have interest you would find the sample with interest would be more likely to attack someone. Does the consumption of CP drive the desire or does the desire lead to the consumption and subsequent unwanted behavior in some people? Is punishing people for their desires and driving them underground really helpful? All to sate our sense of disgust? Is this even compatible with due process? Ideally, you would advance technology such as to make artificial alternatives indistinguishable from reality and produce robots. Or whatever it takes. Disgusting? Sure. But, it is better than the alternative and it preserves the high standards we set for our liberal democracy. You keep out of other people's business and they keep out of yours. No one tells you how to live your life, so long as you don't bother them.
    - throw149102 6y ago
      I have no idea how a researcher is supposed to show that CP induces demand in pedophiles without running into some pretty massive fundamental issues. There are already troubles getting people to admit who they're going to vote for anonymously, so getting people to admit that they are using child pornography anonymously seems like an extremely tall task. I've also seen studies trying to show the opposite, or trying to show that there is no causation either way, so I don't think there is anything resembling a consensus on this issue at all.
    - claudiawerner 6y ago
      >So it's nothing at all like playing GTA. It probably is at least somewhat. Violent video games have also been shown to increase feelings of aggression in lab settings and in some cases even foster sexist attitudes. I mentioned this to you in another comment, but Gary Young's The Gamer's Dilemma book is a very good book-length treatment on the issue of virtual violence vs "virtual pedophilia".
- buisi 6y ago
  Another theory goes that people who attack children would have done it either way. You punish the innocent for the crimes of someone else.
- manfredo 6y ago
  > Even animated child porn is illegal because the theory goes, it drives demand for the real thing. Not in the US it isn't.
- happytoexplain 6y ago
  One of the easiest ways to fall into medieval behavior is to convince yourself that the property of being reprehensible, or disgusting, plays any part, even small, in "deserving" to suffer punishment by the state. It's the antithesis of civilization, and a dire evil.
- claudiawerner 6y ago
  >I vote for the one that doesn’t encourage or support exploiting children, real or otherwise. Forgive me if I'm interpreting this incorrectly, but are you really saying that you'd vote for a law (which, usually means prison time) for people who 'exploit' non-real children? You need to go into more detail as to your definition of exploitation, or clarify what you mean by 'real or otherwise'.

dleslie 6y ago

Here in Canada that would still be child pornography. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_pornography_laws_in_Canada https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_pornography_laws_in_Ca...

Teever 6y ago
The law in Canada regarding child pornography is so broad that a depiction including stick figures having sex with an arrow pointing to it and the caption "children having sex for my gratification" would count as child pornography.
- dleslie 6y ago
  Canada has both juries and common law; I can't imagine a conviction for something so lacking in obvious criminal intent.
  - nmz 6y ago
    It all depends on how outraged the populace is about the subject matter. criminal intent is secondary.
    - dleslie 6y ago
      Canada has the rule of law, not the mob, and protected expression. Relevant: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_v_Sharpe https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_v_Sharpe
    - buisi 6y ago
      This is true. Some countries allow less realistic content but not more realistic content despite it being a wholly arbitrary differentiation. Many filters censor all of it, regardless of legality and boast 99% abuse detection rates with a low false positive rate. Some filters only the more realistic content. Realistic content does admittedly have a problem where it may become difficult for a human to differentiate it from unlawful content. Although in that particular case, it is hoped it would end up competing with unlawful content and drive demand for it down. People with some degree of awareness to the children harmed to produce the content will not want to contribute to it when there are other avenues which are virtually indistinguishable. It may be possible to do outreach in legal outlets to raise awareness of harms or provide resources to prevent them from committing serious crime.

DavidVoid 6y ago

The deep-fake has to be trained on something. Would it really be ethically un-encumbered if the fake videos were created by a NN trained on images/videos of real children?

mlindner 6y ago
What if you train the NN using data generated from a NN that was trained on images/videos of real children? Alternatively, how many layers down do you have to go of NNs training other NNs before it's ethically okay? If your answer is "infinite" then that is the ethical equivalent of homeopathy where a solution of a bunch of random chemicals is diluted to the point that there is 0% of the original left in the sold product. Interesting question.
- reitzensteinm 6y ago
  It's not homeopathy because you're not diluting it by mixing ethical inputs, you're just doing a bad job of training from a wholely unethical source. It's all fruit of a poisoned tree.
  - lilboiluvr69 6y ago
    Law enforcement has been known to continue running seized child pornography sites in order to collect data on the user-base, the justification being that overall rates of viewing child pornography are reduced through additional arrests. It's an difficult ethical dilemma. How are we categorizing the harm done to victims of child pornography? Is it based on how many different people see the same image or just the number of times the images was viewed in general? Obviously the victim isn't getting some sort of electric shock every time somebody sees the image. Do we include it additional harm if the identifying features of the child in question are unavailable? What if the victim doesn't know they were part of the training model or that there are even images of them on the Internet? Would it be ethical if training data from children in non-pornographic situations was used? What if somebody had child pornography made of them but allow their image to be used (donated?) after they were 18? I'm not claiming to know the answers.

shota123456 6y ago

Cartoons are already illegal and how the hell are you going to defend this in court? Just because its completely "innocent" and absolutely zero child are harmed, its still illegal.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
gruez 6y ago
>Cartoons are already illegal depends on the jurisdiction. at least in the us they're not illegal per se. > U.S. law distinguishes between pornographic images of an actual minor, realistic images that are not of an actual minor, and non-realistic images such as drawings. The latter two categories are legally protected unless found to be obscene, whereas the first does not require a finding of obscenity.
- 236dev 6y ago
  I had to see for my social media website (similar to tumblr) (tiblar.com) if it was legal or not. At least in Delaware lolicon/shotacon and cartoon child porn is illegal. It varies on which state it is, some states it is legal, others it is not. Federally it is legal.
  - manfredo 6y ago
    The Supreme Court has repeatedly struck down state laws banning fake child porn. Since the 2010s a few people have been convicted for it, but only alongside convictions of real images. They probably saw no point in appealing if the other charges would stick. States have obscenity laws that restrict sale and advertisement of this content, but possession cannot be banned by obscenity laws. Think about the mess that would be enforcing this law. You can't objectively determine the age of a fake character, unlike a real person.
    - somebodythere 6y ago
      > Think about the mess that would be enforcing this law. You can't objectively determine the age of a fake character, unlike a real person. It is certainly a mess, but that doesn't stop jurisdictions outside the United States from prosecuting it.

ozten 6y ago

People who consume child pornography have severe mental health issues. They need counseling and treatment. This idea is not what they need and is repugnant. Also, who in their right mind would build, QA, or market such a soul crushing product. Some Taboos will remain Taboos despite “hurting no one”.

hnaccy 6y ago
What if it reduced the rates of actual sex crimes against children? https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/11/101130111326.htm https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/11/101130111326.h...
- ozten 6y ago
  Thanks for sharing this research! My hunch is that it is a local optimization. Perhaps if we focused on de-stigmatizing mental health issues and making access to mental health care easier, that could also reduce rates. It is a universal and much less problematic strategy.
  - Retric 6y ago
    That reads like you are simply ignoring any information you disagree with. For the sake of argument let’s assume it’s the best possible option on any scale you choose, now what do you feel should be done?
- claudiawerner 6y ago
  It's worth noting that the authors here do not claim that it reduced rates, only that it coincided with such a reduction, i.e that the material did not cause an increase in child sex crimes. The catharsis effect has very little empirical support. As such, this paper does dispute the argument that porn leads to higher rates of sexual assault. It does not provide evidence for porn being an outlet that prevents crimes. The distinction is important.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

buisi 6y ago

Public outrage. Legality in some jurisdictions. Chance of employees getting harassed.

throwaway513208 6y ago

Sex bots are after that. Westworld asks "If you can't tell, does it matter?"

throwaw4y-plate 6y ago
These violent delights have violent ends

codezero 6y ago

Computer generated images of children in sexual situations are illegal in a lot of countries, and any country a company like this started to operate in would start to legislate once people make noise.

navjack27 6y ago

Daz3D exists. That has models of all ages for character rendering. Third parties have add-ons for models. This is a thing and has been for ages. Poser is another character rendering program.

goatinaboat 6y ago

much of the demand of child sexual abuse imagery would evaporate. It would not. Sexual crimes are not (only) about sex, they are about exercising power over a victim. Downloading real images of abuse is driven by exercising that power vicariously. If anything images like those you suggest would only fuel demand for the "real thing".

ummonk 6y ago

Or hire dwarf actors.

buisi 6y ago
It would have to be a dwarf who looks like a child in features not merely stature.
- ummonk 6y ago
  Yes, some forms of dwarfism cause that.