3 ms·

You may think that intuitively, but actual studies actually indicate the opposite. Usage of CSAM material leads to increased risks of contacting and abusing chi

You may think that intuitively, but actual studies actually indicate the opposite. Usage of CSAM material leads to increased risks of contacting and abusing children. This needs to be balanced against rights to privacy and expression, which I personally think take precedence, but pretending that it can serve as harm reduction is just not correct.

chatmasta 3y ago
I'm personally highly skeptical of the "offering them an outlet" argument. I'd be less suspicious of the idea if its proponents also suggested limiting it to controlled settings, e.g. during meetings with a professional psychiatrist. But I'm sorry, I just don't believe anyone holed up in their room with a bunch of fake CSAM is "just using it as an outlet" or "protecting real kids from harm." I mean, it almost sounds like a threat: "If you don't let me look at these pictures of fake kids, I'll hurt real kids." If that's the case then they should be seeing a psychiatrist, at minimum.
- LorenPechtel 3y ago
  Pornography reduces rape. Violent movies that appeal to teens reduce vandalism and the like--they're in the theater rather than out causing trouble. (And it's not displaced, rates don't spike later, they just return to normal.)
  - chatmasta 3y ago
    Citation needed.
qingcharles 3y ago
There are so few actual studies of this, and AI images being only a year or so old, that I would not put any weight behind them at this point. My point isn't that AI CSAM should be legal or not, but whether these tools can differentiate what the lawmakers have decided is a crime or not.
callalex 3y ago
Studies such as?
LorenPechtel 3y ago
Of course it's related. That doesn't mean it "leads to"--I think that's a case of the cart before the horse. Those who have no sexual interest in children are neither going to have CSAM nor engage in abuse. The fact that they had CSAM already shows it's a highly non-random sample. The control would be pedophiles with no access to CSAM--but how do you find that control group????

chatmasta 3y ago

I'm personally highly skeptical of the "offering them an outlet" argument. I'd be less suspicious of the idea if its proponents also suggested limiting it to controlled settings, e.g. during meetings with a professional psychiatrist. But I'm sorry, I just don't believe anyone holed up in their room with a bunch of fake CSAM is "just using it as an outlet" or "protecting real kids from harm." I mean, it almost sounds like a threat: "If you don't let me look at these pictures of fake kids, I'll hurt real kids." If that's the case then they should be seeing a psychiatrist, at minimum.

LorenPechtel 3y ago
Pornography reduces rape. Violent movies that appeal to teens reduce vandalism and the like--they're in the theater rather than out causing trouble. (And it's not displaced, rates don't spike later, they just return to normal.)
- chatmasta 3y ago
  Citation needed.

qingcharles 3y ago

There are so few actual studies of this, and AI images being only a year or so old, that I would not put any weight behind them at this point. My point isn't that AI CSAM should be legal or not, but whether these tools can differentiate what the lawmakers have decided is a crime or not.

callalex 3y ago

Studies such as?

LorenPechtel 3y ago

Of course it's related. That doesn't mean it "leads to"--I think that's a case of the cart before the horse. Those who have no sexual interest in children are neither going to have CSAM nor engage in abuse. The fact that they had CSAM already shows it's a highly non-random sample. The control would be pedophiles with no access to CSAM--but how do you find that control group????