• Pooptimist@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    62
    arrow-down
    13
    ·
    1 year ago

    Hear me out on this one:

    If we take it as given that pedophilia is a disorder and ultimatly a sickness, wouldn't it be better that these people get their fix from AI created media than from the real thing?

    IMO there was no harm done to any kid in the creation of this and it would be better to give these people the fix they need or at least desperately desire in this way before they advance to more desperate and harmful measures.

    • DrPop@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      36
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      You have a point, but in at least one of these cases the images used were of the girls around them and even tried extorting one is then. Issues like this should be handled on a case by case basis.

    • hoshikarakitaridia@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      33
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Some of the comments here are so stupid: "either they unpedophile themselves or we just kill them for their thoughts"

      Ok so let me think this through. Sexual preferences in any way or pretty normal and they don't go away. Actually if you tend to ignore them they become stronger. Also being a pedophile is not a crime currently. It's the acting on it. So what happens right now is that people bottle it up, then it gets too much and they act on it in gruesome ways, because "if I go to prison I might as well make sure it was worth it". Kids get hurt.

      "But we could make thinking about it illegal!" No we can't. Say that's a law, what now? If you don't like someone, they're a "pedophile". Yay more false imprisonment. Also what happens to real pedophiles? Well they start commit more acts because theres punishment even for restraint. And the truth is a lot of ppl have pedophilic tendencies. You will not catch all of them. Things will just get worse.

      So why AI? Well as the commenter above me already said, if there's no victim, there's no problems. While that doesn't make extortion legal (I mean obv. it's a different law), this could make ppl with those urges have more restraint. We could even still limit it to specific sites and make it non-shareable. We'd have more control over it.

      I know ppl still want the easy solution which evidently doesn't work, but imo this is a perfect solution.

      • Queen HawlSera@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        I pretty much agree, while we should never treat Pedophilia as "Just another perfectly valid sexuality, let's throw a parade, it's nothing to be ashamed of" (Having the urge to prey on children is ABSOLUTELY something to be ashamed of even if you can't control it.), we need to face facts… It isn't someone waking up one day and saying "Wouldn't it be funny if I took little Billy out back and filled him full of cock?"

        It's something going on in their head, something chemical, some misfiring of the neurons, just the way their endocrine system is built.

        As much as I'd love to wave a magic wand over these people I reluctantly call people and cure them of their desires, we don't have the power to do that. No amount of therapy in the world can change someone's sexual tastes.

        So in lieu of an ideal solution, finding ways to prevent pedophiles from seeking victims in the first place is the next best thing.

        It's not dissimilar to how when we set up centers for drug addicted people to get small doses of what they're addicted to so that they can fight withdrawal symptoms, crimes and death rates go down. When you enact things like universal basic income and SNAP, people have less of a reason to rob banks and gas stations so we see less of them.

        It's not enough to punish people who do something wrong, we need to find out why they're doing it and eliminate the underlying cause.

      • Skwerls@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        There's also a difference (not sure if clinically) between people who sexualize really young kids and someone who likes kids that are under the age that whatever society has decided splits children and adults. In the USA porn depicting the latter is fine as long as everyone is over the age of adulthood, even if they dress up to look younger.

        I think in general people who refer to pedophilia are usually referring to the former and not the 30 year old dating a 17 year old or whatever. But the latter makes it a little weird. Images of fictional people don't have ages. Can you charge anyone who has aigen porn with csam if the people depicted sorta look underage?

        Ai generated content is gonna bring a lot of questions like these that we're gonna have to grapple with as a society.

        • hoshikarakitaridia@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          The first part of your comment is rather confusing to me, but the latter part I fully agree with. Decoding age on appearance is a thing that will haunt us even more with AI until we face new solutions. But that is gonna be one of a list of big questions to be asked in conjunction with new AI laws.

        • hoshikarakitaridia@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          You know what? Sure. Imagine I find ppl really taste, especially hands. But I never chew on one. I just think about it. Literally the same thing. You should be rewarded for restraint on these urges. If I'd get punished for thinking about munching on a thumb, I'd at least take a hand with me to jail. I'm going there anyway.

    • Queen HawlSera@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      That's basically how I feel. I'd much rather these kinds of people jack it to drawings and AI Generated images if the alternative is that they're going to go after real chidlren.

      • Black_Gulaman@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        31
        ·
        1 year ago

        At some point the fake images won't do it for them and then they'd fix their attention to real kids. We don't want to wait for that to happen.

        It's like using a drug with your threshold increasing each time you use, they're will be a time that your old limit will have no effect on your satisfaction level.

          • MBM@lemmings.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            None of us are specialists here, so people saying it is and people saying it isn't harmless are both speculating

          • datavoid@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            1 year ago

            Seems like speculation, but personally I'd be amazed if it were completely incorrect.

            If people who are attracted to children are constantly looking at CP, they are inevitably going to become more comfortable with it. Same with any other type of porn - do you think people who watch tons of torture porn dont become increasingly unaffected by it? It's also the same for any other illegal or shocking content. I spent enough time on 4chan 10+ years ago to vouch for this personally.

            I'm not saying that everyone who looks at these AI images will act on their desire, but some people will absolutely end up wanting more after having open access to pictures of naked children.

            Honestly it's a bit concerning how people are voting this down, why do we value the sexual gratification of pedos higher than the potential safety of children?

        • papertowels@lemmy.one
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          22
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          By your logic, does everyone who's into bdsm have a sex dungeon in their bedroom?

          • Queen HawlSera@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            1 year ago

            I'll come right out and say it, I'm into inflation.

            The amount of times I've went out, bought a helium tank, and shoved a tube up anyone's ass is just about equal to the amount of times I've been the Republican Candidate for the US Presidency… and I'm not even 35 yet.

            I think we all have weird kinks, it's a part of the human experience.

            Heck imagine if we thought this way for EVERY sexual desire someone had.

            "Porn for people who prefer blondes? I dunno, what if they get carried away and start dying random brown haired people? The consequences are too great!"

            Sounds fucking ridiculous when you think of it that way.

        • Queen HawlSera@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Do you know how much porn there is of the My Little Pony characters? Tons

          Do you know how much of an epidemic there is of cartoon watchers going out and fucking ponies? Somewhere between null and zilch… Maybe one or two extreme cases, but that's around the same amount of people who watch Super Hero movies and try to jump off the roof in order to fly.

          This is a slippery slope fallacy if I ever saw it.

          Heck, if anything we've seen that restrictions on porn actually leads to increased instances of sexual assault, in the same way a crackdown on drugs just leads to more deaths from overdoses.

          If letting some sicko have fake images of pretend children saves even one real child from being viciously exploited, I think it's worth it.

          It's not ideal and yeah, it makes the skin of any sane person crawl… Ideally we should be out curing pedophiles of their sexual urges entirely, but since we don't have a way to do that why let perfect be the enemy of good? I mean what other ideas do we have? Cause "To Catch A Predator" may have been good television, but even that had ethical concerns ending in lawsuits lost and suicides performed, and castrated everyone convicted isn't exactly 8th Amendment friendly… and even then that prevents repeat offenses, not initial offenses. (Prevention > Cure)

          Now all this aside, we do need to look at this on a case by case basis. If real children are being used to model for the AI or fake images are used as a form of blackmail (Think "Revenge Porn", but way, way worse), then cuffs need to be slapped on people.

    • random65837@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      In the US we ignore mental illness, make excuses for it, and then patiently wait until sometime terrible happens.

      • Queen HawlSera@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        And when it does, can't do anything about it "While making sure this never happens again is a noble goal, let's not politicize this tragedy."

        Or as they say over in Europe "Apparently the Americans say there's no way to prevent that problem that literally doesn't happen anywhere else in the world."

    • Ataraxia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      14
      ·
      1 year ago

      Jfc what's with these pedo apologists. If someone were a cannibal, would it be totally fine to just give them human flesh removed from surgeries or dead people? Maybe let him pay people to eat them and drink their blood? AI images are trained on actual CP and CP anyway should not be normalized. If someone has ideation of violence then the last thing you do is feed those ideations. Would you think a suicidal person should watch simulated suicide? Why would watching simulated acts of depraved violence because you enjoy them somehow prevent you from committing that act yourself? If you enjoy something that much then you are thinking about doing it yourself.

      • mordred@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Actually the analogy here would be to give "wannabe cannibals" synthetic meat/stuff that tastes like human meat/stuff

      • captain_spork@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        30
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        That is not required. Especially in the larger models like a DALLE-3 it can combine concepts even without being directly trained on it. The one they had in the showcase for DALLE-2 was a chair shaped like an avocado. It knows what a chair is and it knows what an avocado is, so it can combine them. So it can know "this is what a naked human looks like" and "this is what a human child looks like" and could combine them without having ever seen CSAM.

          • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            18
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            "I don't personally know what's in the data set, so it must include CP" is a breathtakingly pathetic argument. Shame on you.

          • JokeDeity@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            See, this is the problem with this entire thread. You guys are, rightfully, upset about what you perceive, but then you take that and use that energy to spread false claims because you think they're true, or you think the lie will help bolster your side of the argument. Instead it just makes you look disingenuous and paints a bad look for everyone. There's plenty of accurate points to be made for why this stuff isn't okay, but you guys are making none of them, very matter-of-factly. Do better. Be better. Make valid arguments, based on fact, or do what people used to do and sit back and let the people who know what they're talking about make the arguments.

      • Womble@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        It doesnt, the whole point of generative ai is that it can generalise and mix concepts. There are likely 0 images of astronaughts riding dinosaurs in the training set but it can produce countless pictures like those by generalising the concepts and combining them.

        Equally a training set contain pictures of children and adult porn could combine the two.

    • treefrog@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      16
      ·
      1 year ago

      Sex offenders aren't allowed to watch porn at all in my state.

      Because science suggests watching porn, and getting your fix as you put it, through porn, encourages the behavior.

      Watching child porn teaches the mind to go to children to fulfill sexual urges. Mindfulness practice has been shown to be effective in curbing urges in all forms of addiction.

      So, no. Just no to your whole post.

      There's effective treatment for addictions, rather sexual or otherwise. Rather the addiction feeds on children or heroin. And we don't need to see if fake child porn helps. Evidence already suggests it doesn't and we already have effective treatments that don't put children at risk and that don't encourage the behavior.

      • Forbo@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        As mentioned on another one of your comments, I am having a hard time finding the science you reference.

      • Lowlee Kun@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        1 year ago

        Not judging/voting your comment, do you have the data at hand? Just out of interest.

        Some input though, you are not making a difference between offenders and non-offenders and i doubt there is even good data on non offenders to begin with.

      • Lowlee Kun@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        1 year ago

        Cool solution to kill people that did not offend. You sound like a real humanist. Do you by any chance run some for profit prison?

        • Mango@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Wrongthink. You are no longer allowed to feel this way under penalty of satisfying our bloodlust. /s

    • snownyte@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      19
      ·
      1 year ago

      That'd be like giving an alcoholic a pint by the end of the week to reward their alcoholic behavior that they'd want out of.

      That'd be like giving money to a gambling addict as they promise to 'pay you back' for the loan you've given them.

      My point is, enabling people's worst habits is always a bad idea.

      And how can you guarantee for certain that after awhile of these AI-generated CP crap, that they eventually wouldn't want the real thing down the road and therefore, attempt crimes?

      Your solution is just dumb altogether.

        • snownyte@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I don't claim to be an expert either, but it's kind of a no-brainer to see what addiction is and what it does to people. Really simple stuff.

      • AnonTwo@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        1 year ago

        …Aren't drug patches already a thing for more extreme drugs? I feel like you just gave bad examples when there's actual examples that exist…

        • snownyte@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          You really like spamming that "slippery slope" term, don't you? It's like your ultimate go-to for feeling like you're superior. Just wait until you use it in a context where you'll look like a dumbass, one of these days in where it doesn't fit.

          • Lowlee Kun@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            If i use such an "argument" and someone calls me out on it i hope i take the critique to heart and think of an actual argument. Everyone looks like dumbass from time to time and so will i.

    • PM_Your_Nudes_Please@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      19
      ·
      1 year ago

      While I don’t disagree with the initial premise, image AI requires training images.

      I suppose technically you could use hyper-realistic CGI CSAM, and then it could potentially be a “victimless” crime. But the chances of an AI being trained solely on CGI are basically non-existent. Photorealistic CGI is tough and takes a lot of time and skill to create from scratch. There are people whose entire careers are built upon photorealism, and their services aren’t cheap. And you’d probably need a team of artists (not just one artist, because the AI will inevitably end up learning whatever their “style” is and nothing more,) who are both capable and willing to create said images. The chances of all of those pieces falling into place are damned near 0.

      Maybe you could supplement the CGI with young-looking pornstar material? There are plenty of pornstars whose entire schtick is looking young. But they definitely don’t look like children because the proportions are obviously all wrong; Children have larger heads compared to their bodies, for example. That’s not something that an adult actress can emulate simply by being flat chested. So these supplemental images could just as easily end up polluting (for lack of a better word) your AI’s training, because it would just learn to spit out images of flat chested adult women.

      • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        1 year ago

        Generative Ai is perfectly capable of combining concepts. Teach it how do today do photorealistic underage and photorealistic porn and or can combine them together to make csam without ever being trained on actual csam

      • captain_spork@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        This is like telling someone to "stop liking rock music" or "stop enjoying ice cream." People don't decide what their preferences are, they just have them. If we can give pedophiles a way to release those urges without harming children that should be a good thing. Well not good, but positive in the relative sense at least.

      • photonic_sorcerer@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        That's like telling gay dudes to stop liking dick. It's brain chemistry and neural circuits, you can't exactly just snap your fingers and be rid of the problem. Humans are complex creatures.

        • such_lettuce7970@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          12
          ·
          1 year ago

          Pedophilia is not akin to being gay (and kindly fuck off with that tyvm). It's akin to rape, or sexual sadism (and I mean real, violent sadism, not roleplay). It is a predatory inclination and @nxsfi is right - trying to frame it as an "orientation" does sound like MAP acceptance rhetoric.

          • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Pedophilia can't be comparable to rape because rape is an act and pedophilia is not. Child rape is often incorrectly called pedophilia, but pedophilia itself is a mental state, and this is exactly the kind of conversation where conflating mental states with actions is entirely unacceptable.

      • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        "Anyone who disagrees with me is a child rapist." That's the level of argumentation I expect from a child or a fascist.

        • nxfsi@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          What's more disgusting, nonces or those who say that it's fascist to ban them?

      • BruceTwarzen@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Stop veing gay, stop being trans, stop being attracted to fatties, stop being attracted to small people.