Oh noes, it's AI VR porn! Run for the hills!

FoxEye

FoxEye

FoxEye

Caporegime
Joined
17 Feb 2006
Posts
29,263
Location
Cornwall
BBC News on as background noise again.

Was a story about VR porn (with "AI" liberally tossed in by reporter for good measure). Glanced around and it looks like Second Life vs The Sims, with a silly VR thing strapped to your noggin (hope it's an easy-clean model).

BBC said that a lot of the "avatars" were under-18. Well yeah, I imagine some of them were literally created yesterday.

Interesting to hear that as well as the word "illegal", the BBC + police were also talking about tech's responsibility to prevent access to "immoral" computer-generated VR porn. Because morals can now be policed? I guess it works well in Iran.

So what does GD think? Should BBC/cops be worried about VR/Second Life and people making risqué models in Blender or whatever? And should imaginary "children" have the same protections as real ones? Frankly, if you can fap to The Sims whilst wearing a brick on your head, you probably deserve some kind of medal.

I imagine Tory MPs everywhere will be sweating about this one for quite some time, whilst pretending they have no idea how that VR headset in their cupboard got there.

Also, lol at BBC covering tech. AI is going to eat us all, apparently.
 
Rather than being scared of people having the wrong values, we should be encouraging people to have the right ones.

Aka, maybe be real conservatives, do culturally conservative things as opposed to just economic things. For example, stop going along with the progressive international flow of treating traditional masculinity and the nuclear family/family values as if they're irrelevant. Men and boys fulfilled in other ways don't get obsessed with porn.


:edit: Yes I am a walking talking cliché, I am aware I don't know everything and that things are not really quite this simple. But it's a thought and perhaps a start.
 
Last edited:
Zefan said:
Rather than being scared of people having the wrong values, we should be encouraging people to have the right ones.

Aka, maybe be real conservatives, do culturally conservative things as opposed to just economic things. For example, stop going along with the progressive international flow of treating traditional masculinity and the nuclear family/family values as if they're irrelevant. Men and boys fulfilled in other ways don't get obsessed with porn.


:edit: Yes I am a walking talking cliché, I am aware I don't know everything and that things are not really quite this simple. But it's a thought and perhaps a start.
Click to expand...

Hold on one moment, I need to turn on my psychobabble filter to understand this.
 
Zefan said:
Don't worry I can generate a reply for you EZ PZ! "Man saying stuff about culture I don't agree with bad. Do better. It's current year."
Click to expand...

So why didn't you say that in the first place.
50743288142_4132b2c759_o_d.gif
 
Last edited:
Thought police comes to mind...but then, AI only generates output based on human input. Is it illegal to have fantasies that are illegal, but brought to "life" visually for others to see and witness. It's unchartered territory really.
 
jaybee said:
Thought police comes to mind...but then, AI only generates output based on human input. Is it illegal to have fantasies that are illegal, but brought to "life" visually for others to see and witness. It's unchartered territory really.
Click to expand...

It's a difficult one really.

On one hand, surely it's better those fantasies are fulfilled in VR and hurt nobody, rather than fulfilled in reality with the potential to cause real harm?

On the other hand - does catering for harmful behaviour and essentially saying it's OK run the risk of normalising it, and making the participants more likely to enact those fantasies in reality?

Like you say, definitely uncharted territory!
 
I think Zuckerberg meta verse collapsed. That was easily predictable.

The big ideas tend to come from indie groups who aren't held to the same moral standards.

Put adult content behind credit cards.
 
@FoxEye

Is this the story you meant?

www.bbc.co.uk

Illegal trade in AI child sex abuse images exposed

Paedophiles are using the technology to create and sell life-like abuse material, the BBC finds.
www.bbc.co.uk

Paedophiles using AI to generate sexual images of minors (under-18s).

Yes that doesn't sit well with me, and I don't like legal porn of any type either, but I don't have a problem with people generating porn themselves if it's legal. It's balancing between child safeguarding, even if no real children is invovled, and an Orwellian state.
 
Yeah, I think so. It was background noise and I didn't catch the beginning of the story. Started watching when they were showing stuff that looked like The Sims or Second Life.

It should be noted that in the UK, imaginary kids have the same protection as real kids. That means that various Japanese publications ("hentai" for those who aren't familiar) are just as illegal as actual images of abuse (the latter having real victims, but the former not).

But it also means that you have the problem of identifying when a cartoon drawing (or 3D model) is under 18? I mean, how bizarre is that?

The "shocking images" they showed on TV were just like The Sims. Honestly, my mind boggles that that can be illegal. It's clearly not real (anything), and it's kind of weird to classify such images as "children". To me it looked like a game from the early 2000s.

But that's just me. I think if you blur the line between what's real and what's imaginary, then why just do that for sex related stuff?

Why not make killing an imaginary person in GTA illegal?
 
Pawnless Endgame said:
Yes that doesn't sit well with me, and I don't like legal porn of any type either, but I don't have a problem with people generating porn themselves if it's legal. It's balancing between child safeguarding, even if no real children is invovled, and an Orwellian state.
Click to expand...
Yeah that part I can't really comprehend. How can you safeguard an imaginary child?
 
FoxEye said:
That means that various Japanese publications ("hentai" for those who aren't familiar) are just as illegal as actual images of abuse (the latter having real victims, but the former not).
Click to expand...
That was the first thing that came to my mind when i saw the story, a lot of anime/hentai really skates the boundaries of CP. Some weeaboos and otakus won't be happy about this!

One of those things that are clearly wrong, but difficult to really police/outlaw. How do you identify the age of an animated character? The 'may lead to escalation' line also doesn't seem like something you should be arresting someone for, but should those individuals be monitored? My uninformed opinion says banning this stuff is a form of safeguarding, but then that goes back to the escalation line. Surely the pros of banning it outweigh the cons?

Governments haven't even got to grips with regulating and managing tech companies and the internet, its hard to imagine stuff like this and AI in general will be tackled any time soon.
 
explicit4u said:
That was the first thing that came to my mind when i saw the story, a lot of anime/hentai really skates the boundaries of CP. Some weeaboos and otakus won't be happy about this!

One of those things that are clearly wrong, but difficult to really police/outlaw. How do you identify the age of an animated character? The 'may lead to escalation' line also doesn't seem like something you should be arresting someone for, but should those individuals be monitored? My uninformed opinion says banning this stuff is a form of safeguarding, but then that goes back to the escalation line. Surely the pros of banning it outweigh the cons?

Governments haven't even got to grips with regulating and managing tech companies and the internet, its hard to imagine stuff like this and AI in general will be tackled any time soon.
Click to expand...
The "slippery slope" argument is commonly used. But there are problems with it..

Either you say that the thing being done now is as bad as the thing that it may lead to. In this case that asserts that imaginary children are the same as real children, which I personally find hard to justify.

Alternatively, you are saying you must prosecute something that isn't as bad, with a sentence that reflects the severity of the thing it *might* lead to.

Either way, it's getting into prosecuting either future crime, or thought crime.

I'm firmly in the camp that the real and the imaginary are utterly different, and in the realm of the imaginary, anything goes. e: with the caveat that it has to be 100% imaginary, and not simply a manipulation of something taken from real life/real people.

I'm also in the camp that distasteful things shouldn't be illegal - only harmful things.

The slippery slope argument - in this case - is also an assertion that people can't distinguish between the real and the imaginary. For someone who grew up with video games, and was running over Hare Krishnas almost before he could say "mama!", I find that simply unfair.
 
Last edited:
explicit4u said:
How do you identify the age of an animated character?
Click to expand...

It's definitely a head-scratcher. For example someone draws an obviously underage child but puts that child in a "fantasy" setting and says "well actually they're a 400yo witch/elf/non-human" etc - where would you draw the line? It's something that would need a fairly robust but nuanced approach to enforcement yet, as always, I think the clamour of "save our kids from this AI evil" will force the Government to be draconian around it.
 
Pawnless Endgame said:
www.bbc.co.uk

Illegal trade in AI child sex abuse images exposed

Paedophiles are using the technology to create and sell life-like abuse material, the BBC finds.
www.bbc.co.uk

Paedophiles using AI to generate sexual images of minors (under-18s).

Yes that doesn't sit well with me, and I don't like legal porn of any type either, but I don't have a problem with people generating porn themselves if it's legal. It's balancing between child safeguarding, even if no real children is invovled, and an Orwellian state.
Click to expand...

Isn't the issue that AI can generate frighteningly real images and even video footage now?

I don't really buy the argument that child porn is illegal only because of child safeguarding either. Otherwise you would get people arguing that old videos where the kids are now adults in real life shouldn't be illegal, as it's not safeguarding children anymore.
 
Sound a lot like the whole "games make kids violent" crap from 20 years ago.

They went on and on about it for years, tried to ban stuff. No one really gave a crap and eventually it just became a non-issue.
 
FoxEye said:
The "slippery slope" argument is commonly used. But there are problems with it..

Either you say that the thing being done now is as bad as the thing that it may lead to. In this case that asserts that imaginary children are the same as real children, which I personally find hard to justify.

Alternatively, you are saying you must prosecute something that isn't as bad, with a sentence that reflects the severity of the thing it *might* lead to.

Either way, it's getting into prosecuting either future crime, or thought crime.

I'm firmly in the camp that the real and the imaginary are utterly different, and in the realm of the imaginary, anything goes. e: with the caveat that it has to be 100% imaginary, and not simply a manipulation of something taken from real life/real people.

I'm also in the camp that distasteful things shouldn't be illegal - only harmful things.

The slippery slope argument - in this case - is also an assertion that people can't distinguish between the real and the imaginary. For someone who grew up with video games, and was running over Hare Krishnas almost before he could say "mama!", I find that simply unfair.
Click to expand...

I will never not find it hilarious that when the CPS decided they wanted a test case and chose one guy to brand a sex offender for hentai schoolgirls the judge felt compelled to mention that no children or child abuse was involved. Then started dribbling about moral outrage and slippery slope justification since he was handing down a 9 month suspended prison sentence for cartoons :cry:

That was about 10 years ago and either hentai schoolgirls stopped being a thing or even the CPS decided it was ******* stupid.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom