123
submitted 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) by beep@piefed.world to c/technology@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] irish_link@lemmy.world 2 points 13 hours ago

As it has been said there was clearly some way it was trained. But for the moment let’s set that argument aside because it has been argued. (Children were hurt in its creation)

What do you think will happen as more creeps do it and use it. They will develop a taste for it and will eventually need the real thing. It will end with kids being hurt.

[-] Amnesigenic@lemmy.ml -4 points 12 hours ago

You can think whatever you want about what creeps may or may not do hypothetically, until you've got actual evidence those thoughts are worthless

[-] Gaslov@lemmy.world 1 points 10 minutes ago

Driving drunk is known to be dangerous. People who indulge in that behavior eventually hurt others. We don't wait for a drunk driver to crash into someone before we arrest them. We arrest them the minute they turn on their car while drunk.

Someone who indulges in sexualizing children will eventually hurt a child and we should not need to wait for it to happen before we arrest them.

[-] Test_Tickles@lemmy.world -1 points 11 hours ago

Evidence? You mean other than the extensive research, clinical tests, personal stories and confessions of offenders?

[-] Amnesigenic@lemmy.ml -2 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago)

Anything's possible when you make shit up. You don't have research to support the claim that viewing any sort of pornographic material leads to behaviors depicted in that material, personal stories and confessions are not even close to the same thing as research and the fact that you bothered listing them together tells me that you're a fucking moron

[-] InputZero@lemmy.world 0 points 1 hour ago

My dude anything is possible when you gatekeep information. You're defending making child sexual abuse material (SCAM).

This is what the entire case was sort of about, and also explicitly not about. Does it harm children and the answer was the first amendment. That's not really an answer. Honestly this isn't a problem for the courts to figure out it's a legislative problem and good luck with that.

My personal opinion, no one should be able to create any sexualized content of children regardless of whether or not it's AI generated, authentic CSAM, hand drawn art, or anything else. Children should not be sexualized, I can't believe this is up for debate.

[-] Test_Tickles@lemmy.world 0 points 5 hours ago

Oh wow. You seem to be awfully enraged about this. You must have some personal investment in people being allowed to view specific types of "pornographic material". Well, don't let something like facts or common sense get in the way of your crusade.

this post was submitted on 30 Aug 2026
123 points (98.4% liked)

Technology

87680 readers
2767 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS