4 ms·

Is there an actual case for outlawing this that isn't based on moral panic? Wouldn't you actually want people to generate those images with AI so they are less

Is there an actual case for outlawing this that isn't based on moral panic? Wouldn't you actually want people to generate those images with AI so they are less incentivized to pay for the real stuff? As long as you don't need actual CSAM material in the training data and the generated images are different enough from a real person (both of which seem to be very possible technology-wise), that seems to be a good thing. Or is there any indication that availability of CSAM material actually increases the likelihood that people act on it later?

_aavaa_ 7mo ago
We don't have (and I doubt we will ever have) tools for distinguishing between real and ai generated images with a guaranteed 100% accuracy (and 0% false negative and false positive rates). Given that, I don't see how you can allow ai generated CSAM without effectively making "real" csam images be unprosectable.
- echoangle 7mo ago
  So you think that currently, until this law is implemented, CSAM is effectively unprosecutable because people can just claim they generated the image with AI?
  - _aavaa_ 7mo ago
    I think that there is a >0% probability that a individual case can be unprosecutable (or at least have the image evidence be much less useful) if the person in question actively starts generating CSAM using AI for the purpose of casting doubt on the legitimacy of any individual real image that the prosecutor wants to use as evidence. The standard is beyond reasonable doubt, and I think that's going to become an increasingly difficult bar to clear if the AI generated versions (either made for their own case or as decoys) are allowed to remain legal.
  - polski-g 7mo ago
    Well they could ask the child in the photo...
- CaptainFever 7mo ago
  You could have government-signed models + programs that are approved for generating CP (not CSAM). It's legal if the signature checks out. Something like https://contentauthenticity.org/ https://contentauthenticity.org/ but for verifying that something is definitely made by AI. (You need to sign both the models and the programs to make sure there's no img2img.)
  - _aavaa_ 7mo ago
    We can't agree on weed or safe injection sites, you think we'll have government approved CP generation?
    - PathfinderBot 7mo ago
      I totally agree, we should aim for all three harm reduction measures.
      - _aavaa_ 7mo ago
        Yeah? How? What strategy do you have for government funded and provided CP that is even remotely within the realm of political possibility?
  - echoangle 7mo ago
    You don’t even need to give them a model, just generate some images and publish them. If you find those images, it’s fine, if you find anything else, arrest them.
    - PathfinderBot 7mo ago
      That works too, though it'll of course result in a smaller selection and therefore smaller impact on the real market.
  - lm28469 7mo ago
    The level of tech solutionist brain rot you need to reach to propose state sponsored child porn generator... This forum is a parody of itself
dyauspitr 7mo ago
I completely agree. Most people were marrying 13 and 14 year olds less than 100 years ago. Yes we want to make people only be sexually attractive after they turn 18 but that’s not reality. That being said I don’t know if the availability of CSAM would increase or decrease real world abuse.
- AlecSchueler 7mo ago
  > Most people were marrying 13 and 14 year olds less than 100 years ago. Not on the planet earth. What are you basing this claim on?
- happymellon 7mo ago
  > Most people were marrying 13 and 14 year olds less than 100 years ago They really weren't. https://www.campop.geog.cam.ac.uk/blog/2024/07/11/what-age-did-people-marry/ https://www.campop.geog.cam.ac.uk/blog/2024/07/11/what-age-d...
  - yownie 7mo ago
    this entire source is exclusively talking about Britain.
    - happymellon 7mo ago
      I provided evidence that "most people" were not marring 13 year olds, contrary to an uncited claim. If you have more specific details on why your country is populated with paedophiles, then please share.
AlecSchueler 7mo ago
> Wouldn't you actually want people to generate those images with AI so they are less incentivized to pay for the real stuff? You got a study showing that's how it works! > Or is there any indication that availability of CSAM material actually increases the likelihood that people act on it later? There's a decent amount of research that shows the escalating nature of pornography consumption. https://fightthenewdrug.org/how-porn-can-become-an-escalating-behavior/ https://fightthenewdrug.org/how-porn-can-become-an-escalatin... You can follow the references in this article. Surely it's better to ask why people are looking for any kind of child abuse material, generated or not, and find ways to help them. As much as it's reasonable to worry about moral panic one might also worry about moral complacency.
- echoangle 7mo ago
  > You got a study showing that's how it works! Assuming that’s a question, no I don’t. > There's a decent amount of research that shows the escalating nature of pornography consumption. Watching more extreme porn doesn’t mean you actually do it in real life later though. > Surely it's better to ask why people are looking for any kind of child abuse material, generated or not, and find ways to help them. Wouldn’t it be best to do both? And also, is there a known way to „help“ pedophiles? Isn’t it like wanting to „help“ homosexual people by converting them to being heterosexual? They are attracted to what they’re attracted to, is there any chance of changing that?
  - AlecSchueler 7mo ago
    > Watching more extreme porn doesn’t mean you actually do it in real life later though. Is this also an assumption? The opposite makes more sense to me intuitively. You're priming yourself to sexualise children. > Wouldn’t it be best to do both? And also, is there a known way to „help“ pedophiles? Why would it be best to do both? You're asking but not putting forward a reason. Currently treatments would focus on helping with behavioural impulses via things like CBT, and reducing physical desires pharmacologically. I'm not familiar with any treatment that involves exposure. > Isn’t it like wanting to „help“ homosexual people by converting them to being heterosexual? I wouldn't say so but would say this leap in logic feels like a bad faith argument. The obvious difference is that homosexual people can engage in harmless sexual behaviours with other people. > They are attracted to what they’re attracted to, is there any chance of changing that? This isn't a settled thing either, medically. Are you sure it's something inherent to the person and not something rooted in trauma? And yes, as I said above, there are treatment options currently available.

_aavaa_ 7mo ago

We don't have (and I doubt we will ever have) tools for distinguishing between real and ai generated images with a guaranteed 100% accuracy (and 0% false negative and false positive rates). Given that, I don't see how you can allow ai generated CSAM without effectively making "real" csam images be unprosectable.

echoangle 7mo ago
So you think that currently, until this law is implemented, CSAM is effectively unprosecutable because people can just claim they generated the image with AI?
- _aavaa_ 7mo ago
  I think that there is a >0% probability that a individual case can be unprosecutable (or at least have the image evidence be much less useful) if the person in question actively starts generating CSAM using AI for the purpose of casting doubt on the legitimacy of any individual real image that the prosecutor wants to use as evidence. The standard is beyond reasonable doubt, and I think that's going to become an increasingly difficult bar to clear if the AI generated versions (either made for their own case or as decoys) are allowed to remain legal.
- polski-g 7mo ago
  Well they could ask the child in the photo...
CaptainFever 7mo ago
You could have government-signed models + programs that are approved for generating CP (not CSAM). It's legal if the signature checks out. Something like https://contentauthenticity.org/ https://contentauthenticity.org/ but for verifying that something is definitely made by AI. (You need to sign both the models and the programs to make sure there's no img2img.)
- _aavaa_ 7mo ago
  We can't agree on weed or safe injection sites, you think we'll have government approved CP generation?
  - PathfinderBot 7mo ago
    I totally agree, we should aim for all three harm reduction measures.
    - _aavaa_ 7mo ago
      Yeah? How? What strategy do you have for government funded and provided CP that is even remotely within the realm of political possibility?
- echoangle 7mo ago
  You don’t even need to give them a model, just generate some images and publish them. If you find those images, it’s fine, if you find anything else, arrest them.
  - PathfinderBot 7mo ago
    That works too, though it'll of course result in a smaller selection and therefore smaller impact on the real market.
- lm28469 7mo ago
  The level of tech solutionist brain rot you need to reach to propose state sponsored child porn generator... This forum is a parody of itself

dyauspitr 7mo ago

I completely agree. Most people were marrying 13 and 14 year olds less than 100 years ago. Yes we want to make people only be sexually attractive after they turn 18 but that’s not reality. That being said I don’t know if the availability of CSAM would increase or decrease real world abuse.

AlecSchueler 7mo ago
> Most people were marrying 13 and 14 year olds less than 100 years ago. Not on the planet earth. What are you basing this claim on?
happymellon 7mo ago
> Most people were marrying 13 and 14 year olds less than 100 years ago They really weren't. https://www.campop.geog.cam.ac.uk/blog/2024/07/11/what-age-did-people-marry/ https://www.campop.geog.cam.ac.uk/blog/2024/07/11/what-age-d...
- yownie 7mo ago
  this entire source is exclusively talking about Britain.
  - happymellon 7mo ago
    I provided evidence that "most people" were not marring 13 year olds, contrary to an uncited claim. If you have more specific details on why your country is populated with paedophiles, then please share.

AlecSchueler 7mo ago

> Wouldn't you actually want people to generate those images with AI so they are less incentivized to pay for the real stuff? You got a study showing that's how it works! > Or is there any indication that availability of CSAM material actually increases the likelihood that people act on it later? There's a decent amount of research that shows the escalating nature of pornography consumption. https://fightthenewdrug.org/how-porn-can-become-an-escalating-behavior/ https://fightthenewdrug.org/how-porn-can-become-an-escalatin... You can follow the references in this article. Surely it's better to ask why people are looking for any kind of child abuse material, generated or not, and find ways to help them. As much as it's reasonable to worry about moral panic one might also worry about moral complacency.

echoangle 7mo ago
> You got a study showing that's how it works! Assuming that’s a question, no I don’t. > There's a decent amount of research that shows the escalating nature of pornography consumption. Watching more extreme porn doesn’t mean you actually do it in real life later though. > Surely it's better to ask why people are looking for any kind of child abuse material, generated or not, and find ways to help them. Wouldn’t it be best to do both? And also, is there a known way to „help“ pedophiles? Isn’t it like wanting to „help“ homosexual people by converting them to being heterosexual? They are attracted to what they’re attracted to, is there any chance of changing that?
- AlecSchueler 7mo ago
  > Watching more extreme porn doesn’t mean you actually do it in real life later though. Is this also an assumption? The opposite makes more sense to me intuitively. You're priming yourself to sexualise children. > Wouldn’t it be best to do both? And also, is there a known way to „help“ pedophiles? Why would it be best to do both? You're asking but not putting forward a reason. Currently treatments would focus on helping with behavioural impulses via things like CBT, and reducing physical desires pharmacologically. I'm not familiar with any treatment that involves exposure. > Isn’t it like wanting to „help“ homosexual people by converting them to being heterosexual? I wouldn't say so but would say this leap in logic feels like a bad faith argument. The obvious difference is that homosexual people can engage in harmless sexual behaviours with other people. > They are attracted to what they’re attracted to, is there any chance of changing that? This isn't a settled thing either, medically. Are you sure it's something inherent to the person and not something rooted in trauma? And yes, as I said above, there are treatment options currently available.