If a pedophile creates a hospital/clinic room setting and photographs a naked kid, will it be okay? Do you understand these problems impossible to solve just like that? Parents also take photos of their kids, and they do not take photos like a doctor would. They take photos in more casual settings than a clinic. Would parents be considered pedophiles? According to the way you propose to judge, yes.

You are basically implying that social defamation is what matters here, and the trauma caused to victim of such fictional media is a problem. However, this is exactly what anti-AI people like me were trying to warn against. And since these models are open source and in public hands, the cat is out of the bag. Stable diffusion models work on potato computers and take atmost 2-5 minutes to generate per photo, and 4chan has entire guides for uncensored models. This problem will be 100x worse in a couple years, and 1000x worse in the next 5 years. And infinitely worse in a decade. Nothing can be done about it. This is what AI revolution is. Future generations of kids are fucked thanks to AI.

The best thing one can do is protect their privacy, and photos from being out there. Nobody can win this battle, and even in the most dystopian hellhole with maximum surveillance, there will be gaps.

Have you considered the problem of doctors, married parents and other legitimate people being labelled as CSAM users and pedophiles? This has already happened, and they are not obligated to take the brunt of misjudgement of tools developed to judge such media. This is not a hypothetical scenario, and has already happened in real world, and has caused real world damage to people.

The argument of planted CSAM is not incoherent, but has also played out with many people. It is one of the favourite tools for elites and ruling politicians to use. I am less worried about it because such a law thankfully does not exist, that will misjudge the masses brutally for fictional media.

An image is not merely an arrangement of pixels in a jpeg,

I am not one of those "it's just pixels on a screen" people. But if it was not recorded in real world with a camera, it cannot be real.

Who will be the judge? If there is some automated AI created, who will be the one creating it? Will it be perfect? No. We will end up in the situation that Google caused to users, like doctors, married parents and legitimate people being labelled as pedophiles or CSAM users. It has already happened to me in this thread, and you also said it. The only accurate way to judge it will be a very large team of forensic experts on image/video media, which is not feasible for the amount of data social media generates.

not every law needs to have a perfectly defined line

And this is where the abuse by elites, politicians and establishment starts. Activists and dissidents can be easily jailed by CSAM being planted, which would in this case be as simple as AI pictures being temporary drive by downloads onto target's devices.

Glad that it will always remain a hot take.

The problem with your argument is there cannot be developed a scale or spectrum to judge where the fake stops and real starts for drawings or AI generated media. And since they were not recorded with a camera in real world, they cannot be real, no matter what your emotional response to such a deplorable defamation act may be. It is libel of an extreme order.

Cuties was shot with a camera in real world. Do you see the difference between AI generated media and what Cuties was?

I consider it as defamation and libel. Yes, it is faux porn, but ultimately the goal is to harass and defame the person.

I think I have been attacked far too much here already. These nasty people are labelling me as pedophilia supporters. I would suggest capital punishment for pedophiles and atleast a non bailable offence law for such defamation actors like the one in post article and these internet creatures that go around labelling people falsely.

Since you are also labelling me as a pedophile/loli fan, I would prefer you provide evidence of the same. Failing to do so will require to take moderator actions.

Justifying your absurdity using hivemind baiting tactics may work on Reddit, but this is Lemmy.

Edit: I have learned my lesson. I will never be this tolerant again. Disgusting people. Leniency just makes you a doormat.

Kindly provide the answer within two hours for false accusations on the other comment, since you are currently active. No further notice will be given.

I can't believe that the person defending sex crimes of this magnitude is a fucking mod

Can you describe where I did exactly this? You might be violating rules by falsely accusing people of things they did not do.

Asking this as a mod. I would prefer an answer in the next 24 hours for the reputation damage you are trying to attempt to do to me. I will not hesitate to take action against such a deplorable act. Lemmy mods are not like this.

And considering I have not deleted any of my comments, I am fairly transparent here simply trying to discuss.

Edit: since you are active right now, you must provide an answer within two hours

The only thing insufferable is reactionary people in this thread. It must be easy labelling people rather than calmly thinking about things.

There are many pedo/loli Lemmy instances that are banned. You may like those, I do not. You might have that problem you are describing in such detail.