2 ms·

But the creation/use of CSAM and meth harm people other than the person using them. I don't see who's being harmed if a model is used to generate a nude image,

by dymk 3y ago

But the creation/use of CSAM and meth harm people other than the person using them. I don't see who's being harmed if a model is used to generate a nude image, and that image isn't distributed.

concordDance 3y ago
The production and sale of CSAM and meth harms people, mere possession and consumption harms only the user.
- dymk 3y ago
  I don't think the analogy to generative models holds. The possession and consumption of meth and CSAM _drive_ production of meth and CSAM; it's a supply and demand market. So simply possessing it harms others as well. A generative model is different. You can produce as much content with it as you want, hallucinated out of thin air. The production of said content doesn't have externalities, other than electricity usage, if the content isn't distributed.
  - concordDance 3y ago
    > The possession and consumption of meth and CSAM _drive_ production of meth and CSAM This is not true, its the buying of it that drives production. If you make your own meth or pirate CSAM then you would be harming only yourself.
zdragnar 3y ago
I wasn't making a qualitative comparison of the harms, merely responding to the question of what kinds of laws and enforcement mechanisms will be used to stop AI pornification of people. Simply put, I don't think we'll see anything we haven't seen before, because this isn't a new thing that hasn't been done before- only the means of production (using AI) is new.
- dymk 3y ago
  I responded with a little more detail to a sibling content, but if laws for banning CSAM and meth exist due to the negative externalities of possessing them - that's where I think this is different. If we see laws come about for regulating AI private-use content production, I suspect we'll see some unique court cases about it, premised around free speech / lack of harm.

2 ms·

But the creation/use of CSAM and meth harm people other than the person using them. I don't see who's being harmed if a model is used to generate a nude image,

by dymk 3y ago

But the creation/use of CSAM and meth harm people other than the person using them. I don't see who's being harmed if a model is used to generate a nude image, and that image isn't distributed.

concordDance 3y ago
The production and sale of CSAM and meth harms people, mere possession and consumption harms only the user.
- dymk 3y ago
  I don't think the analogy to generative models holds. The possession and consumption of meth and CSAM _drive_ production of meth and CSAM; it's a supply and demand market. So simply possessing it harms others as well. A generative model is different. You can produce as much content with it as you want, hallucinated out of thin air. The production of said content doesn't have externalities, other than electricity usage, if the content isn't distributed.
  - concordDance 3y ago
    > The possession and consumption of meth and CSAM _drive_ production of meth and CSAM This is not true, its the buying of it that drives production. If you make your own meth or pirate CSAM then you would be harming only yourself.
zdragnar 3y ago
I wasn't making a qualitative comparison of the harms, merely responding to the question of what kinds of laws and enforcement mechanisms will be used to stop AI pornification of people. Simply put, I don't think we'll see anything we haven't seen before, because this isn't a new thing that hasn't been done before- only the means of production (using AI) is new.
- dymk 3y ago
  I responded with a little more detail to a sibling content, but if laws for banning CSAM and meth exist due to the negative externalities of possessing them - that's where I think this is different. If we see laws come about for regulating AI private-use content production, I suspect we'll see some unique court cases about it, premised around free speech / lack of harm.