this post was submitted on 02 Jul 2025
355 points (97.6% liked)
Technology
72362 readers
2662 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- 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.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Sexual attraction doesn't necessarily involve dehumanization. Unlike most other kinds of interest in a human being, it doesn't require interest in their personality, but these are logically not the same.
In general you are using emotional arguments for things that work not through emotion, but through literal interpretation. That's like using metric calculations for a system that expects imperial. Utterly useless.
No, it's not. It's literally a photorealistic drawing based on a photo (and a dataset to make the generative model). No children have been abused to produce it. Laws work literally.
No, because the woman is not being literally sexually exploited. Her photo being used without consent is, I think, subject of some laws. There are no new fundamental legal entities involved.
I think I agree. But it's neither child pornography nor sexual exploitation and can't be equated to them.
There are already existing laws for such actions, similar to using a photo of the victim and a pornographic photo, paper, scissors, pencils and glue. Or, if you think the situation is radically different, there should be new punishable crimes introduced.
Otherwise it's like punishing everyone caught driving while drunk for non-premeditated murder. One is not the other.
Hey so, at least in the US, drawings can absolutely be considered CSAM
Well, US laws are all bullshit anyway, so makes sense
Normally yeah, but why would you want to draw sexual pictures of children?
Suppose I'm a teenager attracted to people my age. Or suppose I'm medically a pedophile, which is not a crime, and then I would need that.
In any case, for legal and moral purposes "why would you want" should be answered only with "not your concern, go eat shit and die".
I feel like you didn't read my comment thoroughly enough. I said it can constitue CSAM. There is a surprising amount of leewat for teenagers of course.
But no, I'm not gonna let you get away that easily. I want to know the why you think it's morally okay for an adult to draw sexually explicit images of children. Please, tell me how that's okay?
Because morally it's not your fucking concern what others are doing in supposed privacy of their personal spaces.
It seems to be a very obvious thing your nose doesn't belong there and you shouldn't stick it there.
I don't need any getting away from you, you're nothing.
No. That's not a good enough excuse to potentially be abusing children.
I can't think of a single good reason to draw those kinds of things. Like at all. Please, give me a single good reason.
It's good enough for the person whose opinion counts, your doesn't. And there's no such potential.
Too bad.
To reinforce that your opinion doesn't count is in itself a good reason. The best of them all really.
Okay so you have no reason. Which is because having sexually explicit images, drawn or otherwise, is gross and weird and disturbing. And the fact that you are continually doubling down shows me that you likely need your hard drives and notebooks checked.
Please don't respond again unless you are telling me what country you are from so I can report you to the appropriate authorities.
People don't need reasons to do things gross or disturbing or whatever for you in their own space.
Thankfully that's not your concern, and would get you in jail if you tried to do that yourself. Also I'm too lazy for my porn habits to be secret enough, LOL.
I don't think you understand. You're the fiend here. The kind of obnoxious shit that thinks it's in their right to watch after others' morality.
I wonder, what if I'd try to report you and someone would follow through (unlikely, of course, without anything specific to report), hypothetically, which instances of stalking and privacy violations they'd find?
You really seem the kind.