• Dave@lemmy.nz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    In this case if they know it’s illegal, then they knowingly broke the law? Things are still illegal even if you don’t agree with it.

    Most (many?) Western countries also ban cartoon underage content, what’s the justification for that?

    • FaceDeer@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      You suggested a situation where “many people would get off charges of real CSAM because the prosecuter can’t prove that it wasn’t AI generated.” That implies that in that situation AI-generated CSAM is legal. If it’s not legal then what does it matter if it’s AI-generated or not?

      • Dave@lemmy.nz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        That’s not quite what I was getting at over the course of the comment thread.

        It one scenario, AI material is legal. Those with real CSAM use the defense that it’s actually AI and you can’t prove otherwise. In this scenario, no innocent men are going to prison, and most guilty men aren’t either.

        The second scenario we make AI material illegal. Now the ones with real CSAM go to prison, and many people with AI material do too because it’s illegal and they broke the law.

        • FaceDeer@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 month ago

          This comment thread started with you implying that the AI was trained on illegal material, I’m really not sure how it’s got to this point from that one.

    • HubertManne@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 month ago

      Im completely against restrictions on art depictions and writing. Those don’t have the dangers of being real but being pawned off as fake.