this post was submitted on 28 Oct 2024
278 points (97.9% liked)

World News

39096 readers
4083 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
 

Hugh Nelson, 27, from Bolton, jailed after transforming normal pictures of children into sexual abuse imagery

A man who used AI to create child abuse images using photographs of real children has been sentenced to 18 years in prison.

In the first prosecution of its kind in the UK, Hugh Nelson, 27, from Bolton, was convicted of 16 child sexual abuse offences in August, after an investigation by Greater Manchester police (GMP).

Nelson had used Daz 3D, a computer programme with an AI function, to transform “normal” images of children into sexual abuse imagery, Greater Manchester police said. In some cases, paedophiles had commissioned the images, supplying photographs of children with whom they had contact in real life.

He was also found guilty of encouraging other offenders to commit rape.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Mango@lemmy.world -1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

As a child? No. In fact, I can milk that for pity money. As an adult, I can't see how it matters. I don't like it, but it doesn't hurt me any.

Also definitely no.

Again, double no.

[–] otp@sh.itjust.works 3 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

To clarify, the second last question about your children was "would you be happy to ..."

If you wouldn't be happy to, then why not?

And if you would be happy to do that, then why? Lol

[–] Mango@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

You got me there. It's definitely weird and gross and therefore no. That's harm enough, but that's more a matter of it being published and real. This dude doing it for himself is hardly different to me from fantasizing in your head or drawing in your sketchbook. That said, what was his AI training material? He's also doing this for other people and encouraging rape and shit.

[–] otp@sh.itjust.works 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

What makes it different than imagining it or drawing it is that the AI is using real photos as training material. If the parents are knowingly providing images, that's questionable. If the AI is discovering CSAM images, that's horrible. If it's using non-CSAM images of children without the knowing consent of the parents, that's pretty bad too.

[–] Mango@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

How is AI using real photos any different from a person using their real memory?

[–] otp@sh.itjust.works 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Because the AI publishes what it creates based on those images. The AI also doesn't have imagination the way that a person does. It could accidentally create CSAM material with a child that looks exactly like someone's child. And it can generate images that look like photos. Someone sketching something from memory can't do that.

[–] Mango@lemmy.world -1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

AI doesn't have to publish, and also that doesn't make it any different from drawing. I don't think the CP is accidental. Someone with enough skill can absolutely do that.

[–] otp@sh.itjust.works 2 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

Sorry, I meant it could create CSAM that, by accident, looks exactly like one of the source children.

AI "publishes" whenever it gives something to the user.

Drawing is different from AI art because AI art can look like photographs.

[–] Mango@lemmy.world -1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Drawing can look like photographs. How old are you?

[–] otp@sh.itjust.works 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Lol...do you really not see the difference in an AI art generator that can produce realistic CSAM in seconds, and a talented artist who can draw CSAM so realistic that it looks like a photograph?

[–] Mango@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

No I don't. There's no difference. Are you trying to say that talent gives you a free pass where otherwise they shouldn't? Fuck that. The speed is meaningless. The realism is meaningless. The brush you paint with doesn't change the ethics even a little bit.

[–] otp@sh.itjust.works 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

It's not about the speed in isolation. The speed is what allows for the quantity to be much greater.

Just like breaking into one car over night is bad, but breaking into 100,000 cars over one night is a problem of a much greater scope.

[–] Mango@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

So your point is that because he's fast with this tool, it's bad? Guess we gotta institute fake CP data rate limits.

[–] otp@sh.itjust.works 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

A tool that allows anyone to generate countless images of CSAM in minutes (based on real images as input) is definitely worse than someone needing to spend years honing an art and using hours to produce one image of CSAM. I'm not really sure how someone could argue against that.

[–] Mango@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Why? It's pictures. Sticks and stones yo.

[–] otp@sh.itjust.works 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

So again...you wouldn't do it with your children's pictures, right?

[–] Mango@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I'm an antinatalist. I think the shit kids gotta go through regularly is worse than all that.

[–] otp@sh.itjust.works 1 points 3 weeks ago

So if you were to get 5 cents per image, would you do it? Lol