Well, this just got darker.

  • daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    This is an incredibly itchy and complicated theme. So I will try not go go really further into it.

    But prosecute what is essentially a work of fiction seems bad.

    This it not even a topic new to the AI. CP has been wildly represented in both written and graphical media. And the consensus in most free countries is not to prosecute those as they are a work of fiction.

    I cannot think why an AI written CP fiction is different from human written CP fiction.

    I suppose “AI big bad” justify it for some. But for me there should be a logical explanation behind if we would began to prosecute works of fiction why some will be prosecuted and why other will not. Specially when the one that’s being prosecuted is just regurgitating the human written stories about CP that are not being prosecuted nowadays.

    I essentially think that a work of fiction should never be prosecuted to begin with, no matter the topic. And I also think that an AI writing about CP is no worse than an actual human doing the same thing.

    • erwan
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      I’m not claiming it’s legally simple but the difference is that this new “fiction” is very hard, if not impossible to distinguish from reality. Nowadays AI can form a regular human hand.

    • vonbaronhans@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      1 month ago

      I’m unfamiliar with the exact situation here, but when it comes to generative AI as I understand it, CP image output also means CP images in the training data.

      That may not strictly be true, but it is certainly worth investigating at minimum.