this post was submitted on 19 Jan 2025
32 points (76.7% liked)

No Stupid Questions

36409 readers
1041 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

doesn't it follow that AI-generated CSAM can only be generated if the AI has been trained on CSAM?

This article even explicitely says as much.

My question is: why aren't OpenAI, Google, Microsoft, Anthropic... sued for possession of CSAM? It's clearly in their training datasets.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] -1 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

The article says "remixed" images of old victims have cropped up.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

And again, what's the source? The great thing with articles about CSAM is that you don't need sources, everyone just assumes you have them, but obviously cannot share.

Did at least one pedo try that? Most likely yes. Is it the best way to get good quality fake CSAM? Not at all.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 hours ago (1 children)

I don't know man. But I assume associations concerned with child abuse are all over that shit and checking it out. I'm not a specialist of CSAM but I assume an article that says old victims show up in previously-unseen images doesn't lie, because why would it? It's not like Wired is a pedo outlet...

Also, it was just a question. I'm not trying to convince you of anything 🙂

[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago)

I think that aricle lacks nuance. It's a bit baity and attends to the usual talking points without contextualizing the numbers or what's actually happening out there, the consequences or the harm. That makes me believe the author just wants to push some point across.

But I've yet to read a good article on this. Most articles are like this one. But yeah, are a few thousand images much in the context of crime that's happening online? Where are these numbers from and what's with the claim that there are more actual pictures out there? I seriously doubt that at this point, if it's so easy to generate images. And what consequences does all of this have? Does it mean an increase or a decrease in abuse? And lots of services have implemented filters... Are the platforms doing their due diligence? Is this a general societal issue or criminals doing crime?