this post was submitted on 28 Oct 2024
277 points (97.9% liked)

World News

39045 readers
2550 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Hugh Nelson, 27, from Bolton, jailed after transforming normal pictures of children into sexual abuse imagery

A man who used AI to create child abuse images using photographs of real children has been sentenced to 18 years in prison.

In the first prosecution of its kind in the UK, Hugh Nelson, 27, from Bolton, was convicted of 16 child sexual abuse offences in August, after an investigation by Greater Manchester police (GMP).

Nelson had used Daz 3D, a computer programme with an AI function, to transform “normal” images of children into sexual abuse imagery, Greater Manchester police said. In some cases, paedophiles had commissioned the images, supplying photographs of children with whom they had contact in real life.

He was also found guilty of encouraging other offenders to commit rape.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Mango@lemmy.world -4 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] Jake_Farm@sopuli.xyz 7 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Its a form of stalking, probably makes it more likely for them to rape that child, even if they don't wind up doing that it would still qualify as a form of revenge porn.

[–] Mango@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

It's not stalking and "probably" shouldn't rouse a courtroom.

[–] curbstickle@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

It is when they are commissioning these "works".

Ed8t: To be clear, that's what happened here.

[–] Mango@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

Commissioning as in buying? I'm not sure how that changes it to stalking.

IMO, the worst part about it is that there's someone else out there who thinks less of me because there's some naked imagery of me.

[–] GreenKnight23@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

People will always find ways to think less about you.

For example, I think less of you because your comments support pedophilia.

[–] Mango@lemmy.world -1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Why should I care what someone likes so long as they keep it to themselves?

[–] curbstickle@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

THEY AREN'T KEEPING IT TO THEMSELVES.

Holy shit, how are you defending this behavior still?

They find children they want, take pictures of them, send them to this "CSAM AI Artist" for lack of a better term, in order to have CSAM of the specific child they are interested in.

If you dont see that as dangerous, especially as the CSAM creator is encouraging these people to act on those specific children, well... Let me know so I can just block you and be done.

What the actual fuck.

[–] Mango@lemmy.world 0 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Ohh, you're on about the specific guy in the article who went down primarily because of the other shit he's doing along with what you just said. If you scroll up enough, you'll see that I'm talking about hypotheticals. My whole stance is about personal data being ethically in the same category as personal thoughts. Nobody should be convicted for wrongthink regardless of whether it's bad taste or not. There's no important difference between pictures in your head and pictures you put on a screen.

[–] curbstickle@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Well, thanks for the confirmation that I should just block you, because the situation literally is about this guy and the people who targeted children, and you're just giving the old thumbs up because its "just thoughts about raping kids, real kids that they followed and took pictures of - but its cool! There is no way this leads to escalation and the rape of kids".

Got it..

[–] Mango@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

You're the kind of loser who would convict someone over your feelings and call yourself the good guy.

[–] curbstickle@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Commissioning as in a buyer has an interest in a particular child. They ask the guy using ai to make a custom bit of CSAM, so the buyer can have CSAM of that specific child.

That kind of commissioning.

[–] Mango@lemmy.world 0 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Okay, but if I ask someone to draw me a picture of Nicholas Cage naked, is that stalking him? What if I have Nick Cage pictures all over my walls and even ceiling and my phone wallpaper? Is that stalking? Does it help if I'm really horny for him? And I touch myself?

[–] curbstickle@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

We aren't talking about a famous person.

We are talking about someone taking pictures of kids they know to have someone else turn it into CSAM.

The comparison you are trying to make is completely irrelevant. The fact that you see it as a comparison makes it even worse.

[–] Mango@lemmy.world 0 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Do famous people have certain exemptions? Fewer rights?

You can definitely say that them going around trying to get the pictures to begin with is stalking though. I pretty well didn't consider that step and was focused on the AI bit.

[–] curbstickle@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 3 weeks ago

The AI part is a continuation.

And this...

Do famous people have certain exemptions? Fewer rights?

Is completely irrelevant and ridiculous as a comment.

You are comparing a household name and likeness to a child that someone wants to sexually abuse, is near, and able to get pictures of.

Stop talking about celebrities and come on down to reality please.

[–] Jake_Farm@sopuli.xyz 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Oh I didn't realize I needed to be a lawyer.

[–] Mango@lemmy.world -3 points 3 weeks ago

I can buy photos of Robert Downey Junior from Marvel Studios and that's not stalking.