3 ms·
> If we're talking about genuine CSAM, that very different and not even limited to undressing. Why would you think I was talking about anything else? Also, "s
by ben_w 10mo ago
> If we're talking about genuine CSAM, that very different and not even limited to undressing.
Why would you think I was talking about anything else?
Also, "subset" != "very different"
> What the former want is not illegal. So the fact they are a minority is irrelevent. Minorites have rights too.
This is newsworthy because non-consensual undressing of images of a minor, even by an AI, already passes the requisite threshold in law and by broad social agreement.
This is not a protected minority.
- deleted 10mo ago[deleted]
- chrisjj 10mo ago> Why would you think I was talking about anything else? Because this thread shows CSAM confused with other, e.g. simple child pornography. And even the source of the quote isn't helping. Clicking its https://www.iwf.org.uk/ https://www.iwf.org.uk/ "Find out why we use the term ‘child sexual abuse’ instead of ‘child pornography’." gives 403 - Forbidden: Access is denied. Fortunately a good explanation of the difference can be found here: https://www.thorn.org/blog/ai-generated-child-sexual-abuse-the-new-digital-threat-we-must-confront-now/ https://www.thorn.org/blog/ai-generated-child-sexual-abuse-t... > This is newsworthy because non-consensual undressing of images of a minor, even by an AI That's not the usage in question. The usage is "generate realistic pictures of undressed minors". Undressing images of real people is prohibited.