this post was submitted on 04 Apr 2025
208 points (96.4% liked)

Technology

68305 readers
4312 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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Nucleo's investigation identified accounts with thousands of followers with illegal behavior that Meta's security systems were unable to identify; after contact, the company acknowledged the problem and removed the accounts

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 16 points 20 hours ago (3 children)

If a child is not being harmed, I truly do not give a shit.

[–] AutomaticButt@lemm.ee 14 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

The most compelling argument against AI generated child porn I have heard is it normalizes it and makes it more likely people will be unable to tell if it is real or AI. This allows actual children to get hurt when it is not reported or skimmed over because someone thought it was AI.

[–] yyprum@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

As a counterpart, the fact that it is so easy and simple to get those AI images, compared to the risk and extra effort of doing it for real, could make the actual child abuse become less common and less profitable for mafias and assholes in general. It's a really complex topic that no simple straight answer would solve.

Normalising it would be horrible and should be avoided, but there will always be some amount of people looking for that content. I rather have them using AI to create it than having to go searching for real content. Persecuting the AI content is not only very inefficient, it might also be harmful as the only other content left would be the real one that is much harder to catch those who make it.

[–] joshchandra@midwest.social 3 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

I rather have them using AI to create it than having to go searching for real content.

A rebuttal to this that I've read is that the easy access may encourage people to dig into it and eventually want "the real thing"... but regardless, with it being FOSS, there's no easy way to stop it anyway... It's just a Pandora's box that we can never close.

[–] yyprum@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 12 hours ago

And I could rebute to that, that if someone is interested enough to check it with AI then they were likely to try and check it anyway without AI, maybe it would take longer, it would be harder to find... But they'd be the intended audience that now are redirected elsewhere.

To quote myself:

It's a really complex topic that no simple straight answer would solve.

We could rebute again and again and again, and get nowhere because either option is hard to discuss as it is simply impossible to give proper data to prove anything. And worse, when defending the use of AI for it can lead to being told you are allowing it in the first place and that's not even telling how many people still believe that AI needs real sample images to produce those (whether the algorithm is trained or not on CP is irrelevant on this particular point, as it is not needed to be created)

[–] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 2 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

What if it features real kid’s faces?

[–] boreengreen@lemm.ee 13 points 18 hours ago

Then it is harming someone.