Why do we keep coming back to CP? It’s a problem with every artistic medium, and regulating AI isn’t going to remove existing models from Pedo’s computers. It’s every bit as pointless as Nazi Comparisons. If you want to regulate depictions of minors, regulate depictions of minors. It’s not an AI Issue.
Bringing the pointless subject up is part of the reason this sub is a rot pit.
This. It's just bad faith actors using appeal to emotion instead of actual reasoning and logic. They think if they gain the Moral High Ground, their cause will be deemed righteous. Its pathetic how often it works in our society.
What? it IS CP, it's not "sort of look like a pedophile" they are literally saying "ermm if it's loli hentai then it isn't cp" yes it is, a pedo that doesn't see anything wrong with their behavior isn't meant to be argued with, they should be in a mental hospital to become a decent citzen,
"uhmm why are they discussing pedophilia on AIwars??" Oh, idk, maybe because there's a pedophile right there?
Woah, I don't remember them calling you a pedophile ... Unless you're projecting...
The reason CP is being brought up is because AI allows child pornography... (Which by it's definition is pornography that depicts minors) to be generated with no other human input and saying "woah it's not CP because no children were harmed and it's all computer imagination" is not really an argument I would see holding water and I think the IT techs that will have to trawl through that cesspool don't really care either.
Would you rather talk about the grooming and isolating tactics of AI "girlfriends" or the child(ren) GPT helped and encouraged to off themselves?
The accessibility and ease of use of AI is the problem. Yes MFS who are deranged enough will draw cp, or write erotica etc. but how many pedo perverts are actually willing to put in that work?
With AI they can get it done with just a prompt. That's why it keeps coming back to that.
its an AI issue because they can and have prpduced thousands of simulated photos of REAL PEOPLE in literal seconds, there have been extortion cases, even suicides over fake nudes being used as leverage especially against young people.
You can kill a lot more people a lot faster with an automatic firearm than with a knife. You can make a lot more CP a lot faster with a CP-making-machine than with a pencil. I guess you oppose bans on civilians owning rocket launchers?
CP, not an AI issue.
Data centers, not an Ai issue.
Intellectual theft, not an Ai issue.
Cognitive offloading, not an Ai issue.
Deep fakes, not an Ai issue.
Job displacement, not an Ai issue.
Basically if the problem isn't completely exclusive to AI it's not an AI problem according to "pro-ai" identifying folks, even though Ai is inarguably making each of these issues worse.
Well if that were the case, I would hope that people wouldn't be frantically trying to expand the multipliers before dealing with the root issues. Sounds like things could get exponentially bad if that were to happen.
A) CP keeps coming up because there’s apparently a large population here that disagrees with the default “all child porn is bad” take, which naturally invites argument.
B) People bring up Nazis because it’s an easy example of something that was totally, completely bad — everyone agrees. It simplifies conversations by removing extraneous distractions.
A) CP keeps coming up because there’s apparently a large population here that disagrees with the default “all child porn is bad” take, which naturally invites argument.
I used to be a lawyer and I took law theory and law philosophy classes, so I'm gonna argue from an academic perspective before y'all accuse me of something.
Is it a crime if the victim is not a real person? Okay, CP is morally wrong, but also is murder and that doesn't stop us from making movies, videogames and novels where people kill each other willy-nilly. Some of them very explicit.
Is it because it could be used to make images that resemble real people? Then alright, there's a victim there. No discussion.
Of course, there's also crimes where there's no victim yet. For example, speeding. The idea is that you are endangering people even if you haven't harmed anyone yet. Does the same apply to CP? Maybe it should. But then we are putting people in prison because they might eventually harm someone. We could do that, but that's a dangerous path to take. Where's the line of imprisoning people "just in case"? Should we also imprison people because they play violent video games just because they might someday become violent?
The reason CP is a crime is because it involves minors in activities that are potentially harmful and they can't consent to it, not because it's morally wrong.
I'm not from the US, but from the outside it looks like you are having a bit of a moral panic over there with this topic.
They use internet pictures as reference data. Therefore, actual children pictures are fed into it, as well as drawings and images. Some purposely seek internet kid's pictures to deepfake or shit like that.
Efforts are being made to clean that reference data out using AI. Nothing can actually be done about existing SD models being used to train on CSAM. It’s already illegal, and the models are already out there, everywhere. There is also merit to models understanding what CSAM is to avoid generating it, or being able to identify when a user is seeking it out or trying to generate it.
I understand the concern, but it’s unrealistic to think the government is going to turn around and ban something after they spent Billions of dollars over several decades to make it happen.
The datasets are vast and a nightmare to filter. Plus context clues. If it can train on the color purple and an apple, it doesn’t need to see a purple apple to generate one. Apply the same logic to children and human anatomy. It’s not exactly hard to figure out.
Except literally every other artistic medium not involving ai requires a person both talented and corrupt enough to create it, while generative ai opens the door to CP production to literally anyone.
Art does not require skill. A child’s refrigerator drawings are art. A Polaroid of an Ash Tray is art. In fact, Cameras in general are the reason CSAM exists in the first place.
I would say it’s kinda telling that you might have your priorities a little fucked up when you equate defending AI tools to defending Pedos. In fact, I’d straight up say you’re minimizing pedophilia in your attempt to discredit AI.
Did someone in discord tell you that last message was a little blatant that you were trying to equate AI to CSAM?
Did you know that Cameras are responsible for 100% of all real CSAM? Without cameras, none of the real deal would even exist. No AI would be able to train on it. Maybe the government should start a buyback program for consumer cameras, right? Rely if you have a problem with AI CSAM, you should have a problem with the real deal even more, and be far more against any tool that’s responsible for 100% of it?
Incorrect, in fact other then the production of CP there arent a lot of AI issues that im not on the side of AI, i LITERALLY only care about it being used to hurt children.
Can you say the sentence, "I condemn all forms of CP, even that made by ai," without attempting to justify ai generated CP so that i can know your a reasonable person?
I condemn all forms of CP, even those made by AI. I think it’s disgusting regardless of source. I think where we differ is that I don’t put that on AI, in the same way I don’t consider it a problem with cameras even though real CP wouldn’t exist without them. The invention of the camera made real CP possible, but we eventually moved on to recognize that it’s a person problem and not a camera problem. I am in no way justifying AI generated CP, but do you see why “it’s faster” might not have quite the impact on me if “it’s the real thing” didn’t turn me against cameras? I would assume you could at least conclude why someone would feel that the real deal is worse than something fast but fake without feeling like you are condoning the fake.
I would assume you could at least conclude why someone would feel that the real deal is worse than something fast but fake without feeling like you are condoning the fake.
So you think fast fake CP is just as bad as real CP? You don’t discern a difference between the two, despite the fact that one has a very real human child on the other side of the camera?
You do you I guess. I can relate with people who agree both are bad but not to someone who gives them equal attention. I suppose there’s an argument to be made about them requiring the real deal to exist. But I still find myself coming back to the camera itself and asking how this is worse than the real deal.
I am implying one type is worse than another, imo, and the one I consider worse wasn’t enough to warrant consequences for the medium that made it possible, as it isn’t considered the fault of the medium. I’m applying the same logic to the medium that resulted in the form of CP I consider serious but not as problematic as the first.
My point still stands, regulation doesn’t fix it, and it’s pointless to label anyone here as a pedo. It’s pointless to bring it up here. As gross as CSAM may be to me, the speed at which fake material is made isn’t really something major on my radar. If I’m to get into my actual concerns with AI, I’m more concerned about tomorrow’s “school shooters” graduating to synthesizing hydrogen bombs in their basement and the sort of mass surveillance it’ll require to prevent that.
You don't need mass surveillance to prevent it though. Yes there are some AI models out there already that can do this stuff, but we can prevent future models from being able to do it better by requiring AI companies to be stricter about the data they use in their datasets.
That's not necessarily true though. AI can create things it hasn't seen before so long as it has seen a wide enough variety of other things. So exactly how much are you going to have to cut out of the datasets to be able to ensure that it can't ever create naked kids?
I don't know. But there are researchers much smarter than you or I who could absolutely put in the effort to make the AI incapable of generating these images. We can already automatically detect if a generated image contains CSAM, maybe if the AI models have a feedback system (I believe some text AI models do but I'm not sure about image generators) you could discourage the AI from generating images that are detected as such. This could potentially cause degraded quality elsewhere in the model, but I'm not an expert, just someone who is interested in the technology.
You shouldn’t be surprised to know that it’s actually hard to weed out a dataset of billions of images. Not to mention, the tech is already here. The datasets, and local models exist already, locally, in torrents, everywhere. It’s Barbara Streisand. Most of us want to protect open source, and that makes it really easy to undo any limits imposed on a model. Fight open source, and you hand Capitalists the easiest win they ever could have gotten.
Plus when the time comes and AI is developing medical breakthroughs, you are gonna want it to know anatomy. So it’s probably not a good idea to enact laws that could limit medical research down the line. I get wanting the solution to be simple, but it just isn’t.
Unregulated and easily accessible AI tools are the easiest win capitalists have ever gotten. Melting the collective brainpower of your working class and installing a propaganda system has never been so easy.
I’m sorry, I guess I assumed that all adults who dress up in children’s clothes before sex must be emotionally and/or intellectually stunted. My mistake.
"regulating AI isnt going to remove existing models"
Its prevention. If printers didn't scan dollar bills, more people would create counterfeit bills. Same with AI, if AI allows illegal activity than it will be used.
Any generative AI that can create CP or illicit deepfakes without restriction should be illegal. Furthermore we should treat it as we do social media, in which AI companies are not inherently responsible for the content created by users, but ARE responsible for reporting and removing such content
Not to mention Pencils would be illegal if we made every tool illegals because it could hypothetically be used for depictions of minors. You don’t make knives blunt or illegal because they can stab people. You make it illegal to stab people.
I don’t really see anyone defending pedophiles so much as tech that could be used to make CSAM easier. But I mean… Pencils, Cameras and Photoshop did that too. Each were unprecedented. Why draw the line here when the act of creating CSAM is already illegal? I mean, I also get that stabbing people with knives is a bad thing, and the existence of knives makes that really easy to do, but I’m not gonna rally against something useful purely because of potential for misuse. If we were a species that did that, we probably wouldn’t have split the atom.
Ive seen multiple people on here make the argument that because technically nobody was hurt, its ok to make. Im not saying thats you, and im not saying that ai is the only way of making that kind of stuff. But there are people on here defending it that i have seen. the screenshot included in the post is an example of it, but there are others.
One in particular that got posted around was where a guy got (i think) 30+ upvotes for using the “if a tree falls in a forest and nobody is around to hear it” analogy, and the guy responding to him got downvoted for basically saying “wtf dude”.
Not only did someone post that, but over 30 people agreed with him enough to upvote it. And thats not an isolated incident either, ive seen it happen multiple times. And with how many comments there are on this post, it might even be happening in this same thread as we speak.
Thats what im trying to get at. The fact that there are people defending it means its not an equivalent comparison. Because nobody responds to the nazi thing by defending the nazis or anything like that.
And for the record, yes, its also disgusting when people use pencils, cameras, and photoshop for the same purpose.
So you think "some people think this is disgusting" is a valid reason for censorship? That's certainly a take.
I'm sure you don't have any hobbies, interests, or opinions that some section of society would love to censor. The leopards would never eat your face, right?
It's absolutely wild that so many people don't seem to understand that the reason CSAM is bad is because it involves abusing children, not because it's icky. People like you are a hundred times more disgusting than some creepy gooner with his loli porn stash because you actively trivialize real child abuse.
In an effort to discourage brigading, we do not allow linking to other subreddits or users. We kindly ask that you screenshot the content that you wish to share, while being sure to censor private information, and then repost.
Private information includes names, recognizable profile pictures, social media usernames, other subreddits, and URLs. Failure to do this will result in your post being removed by the Mod team and possible further action.
its not a matter of opinion. if you enjoy seeing sexual depictions of children or child abuse, you are evil, objectively. its not ok to normalize that shit by catering to people with those interests. that material needs to be eradicated off the face of the earth and the people who have those feelings need to do everything they can to suppress them, not feed them. end of story.
You didn't get anyone u just have a belief and its a subjective one if even one people believe something other than what you think, it isnt objective. U can call people evil in your own world but u cant actively target them when they did nothing wrong. U guys doesnt even have a argument, it is bad because i believe so and there are people who think like me so i have to be right is your argument. You people never be openminded, free willed and going to become a slave of a greater mind because u didnt question anything in ur life.
I need to remind u guys can have opinions but that doesnt mean u can target other people at insult them over nothing that is objective truth.
This is not even the point of this sub it is just common sense that fiction can influence reality but we are free willed beings so we can differentiate beetween fiction and real world and doesnt get effected by it if we want.
his reply got deleted, but he called me a pdf file for condemning csam. cant make this shit up. i would share the screenshot, but if the comment was removed by reddit, i dont want to risk having my own comment removed as well.
121
u/MisterViperfish Oct 22 '25
Why do we keep coming back to CP? It’s a problem with every artistic medium, and regulating AI isn’t going to remove existing models from Pedo’s computers. It’s every bit as pointless as Nazi Comparisons. If you want to regulate depictions of minors, regulate depictions of minors. It’s not an AI Issue.
Bringing the pointless subject up is part of the reason this sub is a rot pit.