• Alphane Moon@lemmy.worldOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    You would be fine with AI-gen porn images of your teenage daughter being distributed around the internet?

        • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          16
          ·
          3 days ago

          Making forged pics of someone else falls under defamation.

          It’s very clearly not rape, sexual abuse, child pornography or non-consensual pornography.

            • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              3 days ago

              Even knowing what Internet is, I sometimes try to pretend the other side is arguing in good faith.

              I mean, it’s as if someone pushed me and I would try to sue them for cutting my hand off. With that hand present.

              I would understand the “this punishment is not enough, we have to do more” sentiment, but instead of “more” they are trying to alias a different action with an existing action with harsher punishment.

    • droporain@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      24
      ·
      3 days ago

      Meanwhile in reality check out what she is distributing through Snapchat and only fans… Maybe pursuing the actual crimes first then if there’s spare resources go after fiction.

      • Todd Bonzalez@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        3 days ago

        Big “but what was she wearing?” energy here.

        I don’t give a shit if she’s doing Shein bikini hauls on Youtube. If you use AI to nudify her pictures, you’re manufacturing child pornography, and deserve the full consequences for doing that.

        As for OnlyFans, they are quite strict about age requirements. Children aren’t running OF accounts. You just hate women and needed to bring up OF to slut-shame.

        • droporain@lemmynsfw.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          3 days ago

          No I’m just pointing out the obvious fake morality. Big “somebody think of the children” energy here Todd. You just hate common sense and logic and are bringing it up because you need a knee jerk reaction to simulate an emotional response from real humans.

        • sunzu2@thebrainbin.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          3 days ago

          If you use AI to nudify her pictures, you’re manufacturing child pornography, and deserve the full consequences for doing that.

          Somebody in non US satellite foreign state can go and do that now from the youtube “bikini hauls” since they publicly avaoialble

          What are you or the feds gonna about that, chief?

          If that is your or her concern, don’t post pictures online. Otherwise, you are literally the mercy of the internet. Privacy 101.

          I am sure giving feds extra powers on this won’t end like everything else, ie abused against lesser peons.

        • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          3 days ago

          If you use AI to nudify her pictures, you’re manufacturing child pornography, and deserve the full consequences for doing that.

          No, equating this to an actual child being raped is incorrect. These are not crimes of remotely equal magnitude.

          Comparing a person who raped a child, made photos and distributed them to a person who used Photoshop or an AI tool is, other than just evil, reducing the meaning of the former.

          • Arkouda@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            3 days ago

            It is weird how hard you have been defending the production of child pornography in this thread.

              • Arkouda@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                3 days ago

                They are now at the point of calling me a disgusting person who doesn’t belong in civilized society because I am against the production, and use, of child pornography.

                Give me a million attempts and I would never have guessed that is the person I would encounter today. haha

            • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              3 days ago

              What this conversation is about has as much to do with child pornography as hentai with loli characters.

              You just can’t argue without unsubstantiated accusations, can you?

              When real living people are being murdered and abused in droves, you are still worried more about glorified automated Photoshop and accusing its users of being the same as actual rapists.

              • Arkouda@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                3 days ago

                What this conversation is about has as much to do with child pornography as hentai with loli characters.

                Creating sexually explicit images of minors is child pornography.

                You just can’t argue without unsubstantiated accusations, can you?

                You literally confirmed my claim in your first sentence, and your last.

                When real living people are being murdered and abused in droves, you are still worried more about glorified automated Photoshop and accusing its users of being the same as actual rapists.

                Production of child pornography is production of child pornography. It does not need to involve rape. Producing child pornography is a separate crime.

                Its users are pedophiles because they are producing child pornography. You are defending them.

                These are the facts.

                • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  5
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  3 days ago

                  Producing child pornography is a separate crime.

                  Victimless crimes are not crimes. Thus producing any pornography is a crime only when it involves violating someone’s rights.

                  Its users are pedophiles because they are producing child pornography. You are defending them.

                  Ah, so you are dumb enough to think it’s bad to defend pedophiles who have not committed a crime against a real person?

                  Damn right, I am defending pedophiles who are being persecuted for being born with that deviation alone. I am also defending pedophiles who satisfy that via any means not harming real people. I will do both till my last breath.

                  If your argument is that they are disgusting and you don’t want them in society, then so are you.

                  • Arkouda@lemmy.ca
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    4
                    ·
                    3 days ago

                    Victimless crimes are not crimes. Thus producing any pornography is a crime only when it involves violating someone’s rights.

                    You mean like when someone takes a photo of a minor, removes their clothing to make a sexually explicit image, and uses that image to harass, bully, and extort?

                    Ah, so you are dumb enough to think it’s bad to defend pedophiles who have not committed a crime against a real person?

                    Taking a picture of a minor, making that image sexually explicit, and using it to harass, bully, and extort that minor is not a “crime against a real person”?

                    Damn right, I am defending pedophiles who are being persecuted for being born with that deviation alone. I am also defending pedophiles who satisfy that via any means not harming real people. I will do both till my last breath.

                    You should stop “defending” their “right” to child pornography and start advocating for them to get real help with the very serious mental disorder that causes them to want sexual activity with a minor instead.

                    If you argument is that they are disgusting and you don’t want them in society, then so are you.

                    My argument is that they should not be given child pornography. Your argument is that they should.

                    The disgusting people I don’t want in society are people who use child pornography, and those who defend their use of child pornography.

                    Kindly see yourself out and take the rest with you.