Even right now you can see some of the example images are generated with a hand on the breast through a bikini top.
Even right now you can see some of the example images are generated with a hand on the breast through a bikini top.
In general when it comes to porn and porn-adjacent content, "I know it when I see it" remains how the law generally works :(
There are VTubers and video game characters that in their canonical profiles will say things like 'eternally 17' or whatever. How is a regulator supposed to interpret something like that when deciding whether something is meant by the artist to be transgressive or not? We know the actresses involved and the artists are all adults, of course.
https://github.com/AUTOMATIC1111/stable-diffusion-webui/wiki...
Look at some of the embeddings in the mega link, there is unambiguous loli content there.
Same way Photoshop can be considered a tool for drawing images of underage cartoon children.
People can argue that generating loli content is an alright thing to do (good luck), but at least one of the embeddings linked was explicitly finetuned to generate loli content.