A sex offender convicted of making more than 1,000 indecent images of children has been banned from using any “AI creating tools” for the next five years in the first known case of its kind.

Anthony Dover, 48, was ordered by a UK court “not to use, visit or access” artificial intelligence generation tools without the prior permission of police as a condition of a sexual harm prevention order imposed in February.

The ban prohibits him from using tools such as text-to-image generators, which can make lifelike pictures based on a written command, and “nudifying” websites used to make explicit “deepfakes”.

Dover, who was given a community order and £200 fine, has also been explicitly ordered not to use Stable Diffusion software, which has reportedly been exploited by paedophiles to create hyper-realistic child sexual abuse material, according to records from a sentencing hearing at Poole magistrates court.

  • PotatoKat@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    7 months ago

    I don’t see a reason to discuss if it’s possible to to something if the thing that’s being done is morally wrong. If you disagree then let’s talk about making a white ethno state or if we can do another Holocaust since morality doesn’t matter when discussing hypotheticals

    You can’t generate csam without photos of children to make up the actual child part of the picture. It doesn’t matter if you actually use csam you’re still using photos of children to make pornography. Unless you think ai could create a van gogh style picture without any van gogh training data (and if you do then you don’t know enough about ai generated photos to talk about them with any authority)

    • Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      I don’t see a reason to discuss if it’s possible to to something if the thing that’s being done is morally wrong.

      What? You can’t think of any reason you might want to discuss whether it’s possible to do something that would be immoral if it is? I don’t believe you’re being honest; I think you’re deliberately trying to deflect because you’ve figured out you’re wrong and don’t want to admit it. Here’s an example to illustrate my point: killing people is generally wrong. Let’s say there’s some discussion about relaxing restrictions on some tool, say knives. Do you really think there’s no point in talking about how it’d be possible to more easily commit murder if such restrictions were relaxed? Discussing the possibility of immoral behavior is an activity that can alter the course of entire civilizations. I cannot fathom how you thought that was a reasonable thing to claim.

      talk about making a white ethno state

      Ok. Making a white ethnostate would require committing genocide and forcing all ethnic minorities into a state of subjugation, by definition (unless I’m mistaken). This can theoretically be done without naming these groups in the law. For this reason civil rights are a necessary but not sufficient component in preventing an ethnostate from arising.

      There. Happy now? If not, then that’s too bad, because that’s not what I want to talk about.

      You can’t generate csam without photos of children to make up the actual child part of the picture.

      Sure, but that’s not contradicting my position. Have you stopped disagreeing with me?

      • PotatoKat@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        If you don’t understand that then I’m done here because you either don’t understand what “ai” does on a fundamental level or you don’t understand how big the difference is between adult and child bodies.

        This is a gross conversion to be having on something that is so wrong to do on so many levels.

        You can’t make an ethno state without genocide so it is wrong and pointless to talk about

        You can’t make ai csam without harming a child so it is wrong and pointless to talk about

      • PotatoKat@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        Just like how you can’t generate a child without pictures of children to base it on you can’t generate them naked without pictures of their bodies. There is a reason pedos are attracted to those bodies and not women with no curves/small men.

        I work with children, I see them everyday. The difference is so massive that an ai would not be able to approximate it with just photos of adults. Ai doesn’t “know” anything it just has photos that it uses to approximate what is being asked based off it’s data. Even if you kept describing in more detail what those bodies looked like it wouldn’t be able to create it without anything to base it on. It’d be like creating a van gogh style picture with no van gogh training data, no matter how much you try to describe the details of his style you’ll never get the ai to make something like it without the training data.

        You can keep disagreeing, keep saying “but with more data” but ai can’t make anything original, that is a fundamental misunderstanding of it’s abilities. If it doesn’t have the data it can’t accurately do it.