3 ms·
It’s not unreasonable to suspect that engaging in high-fidelity simulations of these behaviors will further entrench and worsen paraphilias. This is pretty evid
by landl0rd 1y ago
It’s not unreasonable to suspect that engaging in high-fidelity simulations of these behaviors will further entrench and worsen paraphilias. This is pretty evident with the progression of many pornography addictions that don’t include these sorts of things that still follow the pattern of increasing novelty seeking leading to increasingly deviant stuff.
I am at a principled level uneasy with what’s fundamentally a sort of prior restraint (you haven’t yet hurt anyone but this may increase the likelihood and/or be an effective proxy to lock up those who are more likely to do so) but also see a really strong case for doing it given the fact that these are arguably the most antisocial behaviors one can imagine.
- kristopolous 1y agoRight, I'm just a technologist. The psychological and sociological parts aren't my bailiwick Typing a prompt in an AI box to make art has fewer real-world victims than performing the acts, filming them, and then sharing the videos. I think that's inarguable. Maybe it's still unadvisable and someone should be in talk therapy. I have no idea. But at least nobody is actually getting molested and retraumatized in the ai art scenario. If someone is spending their time using comfyUI drawing pictures instead of stalking the local middleschool, I'd hesitate to say mission accomplished ... but maybe I should? People's time is finite. They can't be doing both. If the real is substituted for the imaginary then the real can no longer happen because that time is spent.
- Aeolun 1y agoThe model has to be trained on something though. It’s easy to see how this works for art art, because people have been drawing that shit for years, and most people wouldn’t feel to bad about training on it. I don’t think that’s true for the photorealistic models though.
- kristopolous 1y agosure but those features have been generalized over very large datasets. Yes, you can have Loras with specific people, convincingly voice clone with higgs, use latentsync, wan, flux kontext, face swap, lots of things ... sure. This all falls flat on me though. It's like showing me the lewdest most shocking story and then saber rattle about keyboards and word processors. I'm fully aware of the wild things people do with drawing programs. We're all adults here. It's fine.
- School-Cotton 1y agoAre there any actual studies on this? Does access to simulations of illegal or objectionable material make pedophiles, rape fetishists, etc. more or less likely to try to access the real thing (or even worse, to try to commit crimes in the real world)? Because both possibilities are plausible, it’s hard to know which is correct.
- kristopolous 1y agoEven if there are I and likely you lack the qualifications of making any clinical takeaways from them. I'd really defer to experts. I try to make tools in good faith and hope they're used responsibly to make the world a better place. I'm not a clinical psychologist nor can I pretend to understand medical literature like someone with a PhD
- danw1979 1y agoI can’t tell if the part of this post after they have made this “thing of questionable safety” and then bury their head in the sand is satirical or not.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- kristopolous 1y agoWhy is it controversial to state that medical expertise is a technical field that engineers should defer to experts in? It doesn't mean I can do things recklessly. Instead it's an acknowledgment of when I need to defer to somebody else just like I need to call up an attorney for legal stuff or an accountant for tax stuff.
- School-Cotton 1y agoIt’s not controversial but it doesn’t address my question at all. A: I’m curious about X. B: We should trust the experts! Sure, but what do the experts say? That was my entire question.