this post was submitted on 30 Sep 2023
550 points (97.7% liked)

World News

39004 readers
2622 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] JoBo@feddit.uk -2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

There's no parallel here. Providing safe access to drugs reduces harm to the user and the harm done by the black-market drug trade. Normalising AI-generated CSAM might reduce the harm done to children during production of the material but it creates many more abusers.

The parallel only works if the “state controlled generation and access” to drugs was an open shop handing out drugs to new users and creating new addicts. Which is pretty much how the opiate epidemic was created by drug companies, pharmacists and doctors using their legitimate status for entirely illegitimate purposes.

[–] shrugal@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Normalising AI-generated CSAM might reduce the harm done to children during production of the material but it creates many more abusers.

The problem with your argument is that you assume a bunch of stuff that we just don't know, because we haven't tried it yet. The closest thing we do know are drugs, and for them controlled access has proven to work really well. So I think it's at least worth thinking about and doing limited real-world trials.

And I don't think any sane person is suggesting to just legalize and normalize it. It would have to be a way for people to self-report and seek help, with conditions such as mandatory check-in/counseling and not being allowed to work with children.

[–] Discoslugs@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

You dont need to keep arguing with this person. There are a pro capitial chump.

He believes " sure capitalism sux but its the best system we have"

Go check out It their comment history.

It has all the feels of a libertarian.

[–] JoBo@feddit.uk 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

The closest thing we do know are drugs, and for them controlled access has proven to work really well.

Controlled access to drugs does work well. But legalising AI-generated CSAM is much more analogous to the opiate crisis, which is an unmitigated disaster.

[–] shrugal@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

How so, if you don't commercialize it? No legal actor would have an incentive to increase the market for CSAM, and it's not like people who are not already affected would or could just order some for fun.

[–] JoBo@feddit.uk 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

That would be a discussion for an entirely different thread. I would still disagree with you but the people arguing in favour of CSAM on this thread don't think it should be a crime to make it using AI.

[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 year ago

Again, how do you know this for a fact? I see your argument being feelings over facts

[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

there is no parallel here

Says who?

[–] JoBo@feddit.uk 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Says me. And I explained exactly why. Feel free to engage with that argument.

[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago

There is a parallel here