4 ms·

child porn?

by ep103 3y ago

child porn?

fieryskiff17 3y ago
[dead]
haolez 3y ago
Are you talking about AI generation? It's absolutely disgusting and absurd, but generated child porn doesn't involve an actual child having its life destroyed. It's extremely uncomfortable to talk about this, but even this extreme case doesn't seem to support the argument against free models.
- pixl97 3y ago
  >but generated child porn doesn't involve an actual child having its life destroyed. Put frankly, the law gives zero fucks about that. Looks like child = jail is the law in many countries in which Google operates.
- cdelsolar 3y ago
  How would they train such a model?
Waterluvian 3y ago
There’s already a ridiculous amount of that being generated by individuals at home. /b/ moderation took much too long to adjust their enforcement behaviours.
- pixl97 3y ago
  And, so? To be graphic as possible, if your commercial AI application generates childporn you will be fistfucked by the long arm of the law in at least the US, Canada, and Japan. While chasing individuals is more difficult for law enforcement a big juicy target like Google could rack up billions in fines.
  - Waterluvian 3y ago
    True. Just because you don’t need a big player to go nuts, doesn’t mean them doing it wouldn’t be a lightning rod.
sham1 3y ago
I feel that for this kind of AI stuff, the company behind the model could probably argue that they're not liable for what the individual user generates. So that for example with CSAM, that as long as they make sure that the training data doesn't contain that stuff, they probably should be fine and not be liable and/or criminally prosecuted. Of course, an actual lawyer could probably explain why this would be a bad idea, but at least I as a non-lawyer don't see where the problem lies (aside from the fact that the company wouldn't want their stuff to be used to create CSAM, which is fair).
- ADeerAppeared 3y ago
  They are not liable for what the user generates, sure. That is a plausible legal argument. But these AI systems do not just generate CSAM by happenstance or the user tricking them into doing it. These systems have their training data obtained by scraping everything off the internet. There is a lot of CSAM (and whatever you will call text/literature describing such things) on the internet, and so, in the training data. OpenAI had some of their Kenyan data tagging partners quit the contract because they had to tag which images and text were CSAM. (With none of the already-insufficient mental health resources afforded to social media moderation staff)
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

child porn?

by ep103 3y ago

child porn?

fieryskiff17 3y ago

[dead]

haolez 3y ago

Are you talking about AI generation? It's absolutely disgusting and absurd, but generated child porn doesn't involve an actual child having its life destroyed. It's extremely uncomfortable to talk about this, but even this extreme case doesn't seem to support the argument against free models.

pixl97 3y ago
>but generated child porn doesn't involve an actual child having its life destroyed. Put frankly, the law gives zero fucks about that. Looks like child = jail is the law in many countries in which Google operates.
cdelsolar 3y ago
How would they train such a model?

Waterluvian 3y ago

There’s already a ridiculous amount of that being generated by individuals at home. /b/ moderation took much too long to adjust their enforcement behaviours.

pixl97 3y ago
And, so? To be graphic as possible, if your commercial AI application generates childporn you will be fistfucked by the long arm of the law in at least the US, Canada, and Japan. While chasing individuals is more difficult for law enforcement a big juicy target like Google could rack up billions in fines.
- Waterluvian 3y ago
  True. Just because you don’t need a big player to go nuts, doesn’t mean them doing it wouldn’t be a lightning rod.

sham1 3y ago

I feel that for this kind of AI stuff, the company behind the model could probably argue that they're not liable for what the individual user generates. So that for example with CSAM, that as long as they make sure that the training data doesn't contain that stuff, they probably should be fine and not be liable and/or criminally prosecuted. Of course, an actual lawyer could probably explain why this would be a bad idea, but at least I as a non-lawyer don't see where the problem lies (aside from the fact that the company wouldn't want their stuff to be used to create CSAM, which is fair).

ADeerAppeared 3y ago
They are not liable for what the user generates, sure. That is a plausible legal argument. But these AI systems do not just generate CSAM by happenstance or the user tricking them into doing it. These systems have their training data obtained by scraping everything off the internet. There is a lot of CSAM (and whatever you will call text/literature describing such things) on the internet, and so, in the training data. OpenAI had some of their Kenyan data tagging partners quit the contract because they had to tag which images and text were CSAM. (With none of the already-insufficient mental health resources afforded to social media moderation staff)

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]