Arguing for the legal production of CSAM is fucked up, even if it’s by an AI.
Also the article specifically states:
AI-generated CSAM may also present other challenges not raised by the government in this appeal. For example, researchers have found that “a major dataset used for training image-generating AI contained hundreds of CSAM images.” Thus, unlike the virtual CSAM at issue in Free Speech Coalition, the market for AI-generated virtual CSAM images may impact the demand for actual CSAM on which the AI models can train.
You’re wrong. We absolutely can draw the line here. And yes, it does harm children. allowing people to create, possess, and distribute CSAM, even if it’s AI-generated, will influence peoples willingness to act on their urges in real life, with real children. It’s not a stretch to consider that linkage. What you’re arguing for is shameful and disgusting.
Some people say it cold help preventing acting on those urges, unfortunately there’s no definitive answer especially because it’s not an easy-to-test topic.
I’d argue that acting on those urges in any way would just encourage further action on those urges. There’s a reason alcoholics don’t drink zero-alcohol beers.
Arguing for the legal production of CSAM is fucked up, even if it’s by an AI.
Also the article specifically states:
You’re wrong. We absolutely can draw the line here. And yes, it does harm children. allowing people to create, possess, and distribute CSAM, even if it’s AI-generated, will influence peoples willingness to act on their urges in real life, with real children. It’s not a stretch to consider that linkage. What you’re arguing for is shameful and disgusting.
Some people say it cold help preventing acting on those urges, unfortunately there’s no definitive answer especially because it’s not an easy-to-test topic.
I’d argue that acting on those urges in any way would just encourage further action on those urges. There’s a reason alcoholics don’t drink zero-alcohol beers.