4 ms·

I wish people would explain why they're downvoting these ethics-related comments so aggressively, because I'm interested in these conversations and not sure why

I wish people would explain why they're downvoting these ethics-related comments so aggressively, because I'm interested in these conversations and not sure why other users find them irrelevant.

pid-1 4y ago
Developers like pretending technology is always good and/or inevitable, I think this sort of question is uncomfortable to many folks.
dragonwriter 4y ago
The GP comment made largely unsupported fact claims, rather than ethical ones.
fragmede 4y ago
I'd bet that downvoting is a kneejerk response to the claim "porn is an addiction".
- moomoo11 4y ago
  Anything can be addiction. Hell I got addicted to weed. At first for years it was fine but then I got into some rough patches when the pandemic started and I was blazed all day every day. It was a temporary escape where I could still do my job but beyond that I had zero motivation for months besides getting more weed. Took months to kick the habit, completely.
- pnt12 4y ago
  Is it knee-jerk? Alcoholism is pretty serious, but you wouldn't say "beer is an addiction". Same with video game addiction and many other things. I find it a pretty prude generalization: it's a catch phrase for people who get offended by sex.
psyc 4y ago
Ethics? Please. It's moral panic. The putatively ethical folks having a "harmless" academic discussion about which nice things everybody is or isn't allowed to have, according to them.
- Throwaway556655 4y ago
  Now it's clear to me you're not being sarcastic. It's not about morals, I'm all in for you to have access to as much porn as you want, as long it's legal. If that's healthy or not for your mind, that's an entirely different story.
  - psyc 4y ago
    I don't trust you concerned "we live in a society" types any further than I can throw yous. (This is tongue in cheek. I'm not upset.)
noduerme 4y ago
I think it demonstrates why it's so easy for technology to run ahead of ethics. No one wants to hear a public safety announcement when they get the keys to a new car. OTOH, I think the risk of CSAM from this kind of thing is overblown, because either (1) it wouldn't actually involve real children in any way, or (2) the model would have to be train on actual CSAM, which there are already laws against. If no humans are harmed by it at any stage, then how's it any different from the CGI murders all over movies and TV? In the absence of harm, the only reason to consider it a crime is that it's disgusting. But we don't prosecute people for having sick thoughts, just for acting on them. If you take the child and abuse out of the equation, the only argument left is that seeing CSAM (artificial or not) is a "gateway drug" to commiting child abuse. If that's the case then why shouldn't we prosecute people for watching Dexter, on the grounds that they're on their way to becoming serial killers?
- kbenson 4y ago
  > If no humans are harmed by it at any stage, then how's it any different from the CGI murders all over movies and TV? In the absence of harm, the only reason to consider it a crime is that it's disgusting. But we don't prosecute people for having sick thoughts, just for acting on them. You say that, but created from scratch drawn material is illegal in some countries. What you've stated is a nice ideal but often doesn't match reality, and I'm on the fence as to whether that's a necessarily a bad thing in this case (I'm not sure we really know enough about sexual drive and how it interacts with the subconscious to know whether it's actually benign or has a societal cost).
  - varajelle 4y ago
    > You say that, but created from scratch drawn material is illegal in some countries. Homosexuality is illegal in some countries.
    - kbenson 4y ago
      My point was the last sentence of what I quoted doesn't quite match reality. We do prosecute people for sick thoughts in some of these cases, regardless of whether we should.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
dang 4y ago
We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32573719 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32573719.
dang 4y ago
The guidelines specifically ask you not to post like this: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html. It's completely off-topic and, what's worse, repetitive. It's frustrating not to be able to know the reasons for downvotes, but it's the nature of the beast. Sometimes people think we should require explanations, but you can't change the way people are by demanding they jump through a hoop. If you see unfairly downvoted comments, give them a corrective upvote (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=corrective%20upvote https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor...). Other users will hopefully do that too. A lot of the time, that happens and then posts like this end up as uncollected garbage in the thread, complaining about something that doesn't exist anymore.
- ignoramous 4y ago
  I've personally noticed that the collective upvotes start right after someone posts "why downvote" rant like gp did.
  - dang 4y ago
    Yes, I'm sure that's a thing too.

I wish people would explain why they're downvoting these ethics-related comments so aggressively, because I'm interested in these conversations and not sure why other users find them irrelevant.

pid-1 4y ago

Developers like pretending technology is always good and/or inevitable, I think this sort of question is uncomfortable to many folks.

dragonwriter 4y ago

The GP comment made largely unsupported fact claims, rather than ethical ones.

fragmede 4y ago

I'd bet that downvoting is a kneejerk response to the claim "porn is an addiction".

moomoo11 4y ago
Anything can be addiction. Hell I got addicted to weed. At first for years it was fine but then I got into some rough patches when the pandemic started and I was blazed all day every day. It was a temporary escape where I could still do my job but beyond that I had zero motivation for months besides getting more weed. Took months to kick the habit, completely.
pnt12 4y ago
Is it knee-jerk? Alcoholism is pretty serious, but you wouldn't say "beer is an addiction". Same with video game addiction and many other things. I find it a pretty prude generalization: it's a catch phrase for people who get offended by sex.

psyc 4y ago

Ethics? Please. It's moral panic. The putatively ethical folks having a "harmless" academic discussion about which nice things everybody is or isn't allowed to have, according to them.

Throwaway556655 4y ago
Now it's clear to me you're not being sarcastic. It's not about morals, I'm all in for you to have access to as much porn as you want, as long it's legal. If that's healthy or not for your mind, that's an entirely different story.
- psyc 4y ago
  I don't trust you concerned "we live in a society" types any further than I can throw yous. (This is tongue in cheek. I'm not upset.)

noduerme 4y ago

I think it demonstrates why it's so easy for technology to run ahead of ethics. No one wants to hear a public safety announcement when they get the keys to a new car. OTOH, I think the risk of CSAM from this kind of thing is overblown, because either (1) it wouldn't actually involve real children in any way, or (2) the model would have to be train on actual CSAM, which there are already laws against. If no humans are harmed by it at any stage, then how's it any different from the CGI murders all over movies and TV? In the absence of harm, the only reason to consider it a crime is that it's disgusting. But we don't prosecute people for having sick thoughts, just for acting on them. If you take the child and abuse out of the equation, the only argument left is that seeing CSAM (artificial or not) is a "gateway drug" to commiting child abuse. If that's the case then why shouldn't we prosecute people for watching Dexter, on the grounds that they're on their way to becoming serial killers?

kbenson 4y ago
> If no humans are harmed by it at any stage, then how's it any different from the CGI murders all over movies and TV? In the absence of harm, the only reason to consider it a crime is that it's disgusting. But we don't prosecute people for having sick thoughts, just for acting on them. You say that, but created from scratch drawn material is illegal in some countries. What you've stated is a nice ideal but often doesn't match reality, and I'm on the fence as to whether that's a necessarily a bad thing in this case (I'm not sure we really know enough about sexual drive and how it interacts with the subconscious to know whether it's actually benign or has a societal cost).
- varajelle 4y ago
  > You say that, but created from scratch drawn material is illegal in some countries. Homosexuality is illegal in some countries.
  - kbenson 4y ago
    My point was the last sentence of what I quoted doesn't quite match reality. We do prosecute people for sick thoughts in some of these cases, regardless of whether we should.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

dang 4y ago

We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32573719 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32573719.

dang 4y ago

The guidelines specifically ask you not to post like this: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html. It's completely off-topic and, what's worse, repetitive. It's frustrating not to be able to know the reasons for downvotes, but it's the nature of the beast. Sometimes people think we should require explanations, but you can't change the way people are by demanding they jump through a hoop. If you see unfairly downvoted comments, give them a corrective upvote (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=corrective%20upvote https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor...). Other users will hopefully do that too. A lot of the time, that happens and then posts like this end up as uncollected garbage in the thread, complaining about something that doesn't exist anymore.

ignoramous 4y ago
I've personally noticed that the collective upvotes start right after someone posts "why downvote" rant like gp did.
- dang 4y ago
  Yes, I'm sure that's a thing too.