>I'm sure there's a combination of words out there that would let someone generate child porn. I hate to break it to you but as long as a piece of art is produ

>I'm sure there's a combination of words out there that would let someone generate child porn. I hate to break it to you but as long as a piece of art is produced without sexual exploitation of children, even if it depicts children in sexual circumstances, it is a legal expression of the first amendment (in the US). Think of "loli" hentai, the myriad erotica stories featuring young children, even books you probably read as an adolescent depicting kids your age in sexual situations. A computer-generated pornographic lifelike image of a nude 13 yr old is completely legal so long as it doesn't depict a real 13 yr old. The question is whether it is possible to do that, and if any pornographic images of children generated by these machines are not in some way eroticizing images of children in the (adobe) photo stock, thereby exploiting them. Either way, the cat's out of the bag now, as soon as the originals are lost and people are just using copies of copies, it will be impossible to track and therefore there would be no legal avenue to stop the proliferation of this type of pornography. It may even become difficult or impossible to differentiate between real child porn and computer generated child porn, and that would make it difficult to prosecute those who produce child pornography unless some new, very specific laws are passed in the US which avoid violating the first amendment.