Some of this is straight up soft-core child porn. This is fucked up.
There needs to be a REALLY FUCKING STRONG effort to kill all CP AI anything. Full stop.
AI should automagically report any attempt at CP.
A model by itself though… you might as well ask a pencil to report someone for drawing graffiti. It does not make sense.
Money laundering, CSAM, terrorism, drugs.
Would you prefer an AI of "describe and print in 8k a body pit of objectional political dissidents thrown into a pit after being starved to death in a comical way such that my SV_BubbleTime can laugh at it as ooppsed to being offended by just how horrific this situation was HAHA"
The censorship isn’t OF those things. It’s in the NAME OF those things.
Imagine getting reported because you generated an image of an anime girl deemed to be only 17.
I'd personally rather live in a world where people generate distasteful images with an AI and have that AI unconstrained than the inevitable one where everything gets locked down and run by large corporations who will ultimately create more harm than someone generating some lolicon.
I don't think an AI model could generate realistic CP without being trained on examples, which would mean there is literally no way for this assumption to be true.
Please show me a model trained on adult humans being fine tuned to generate a child human (fully clothed).
And does my face compare to the ones in the dataset.
>Please show me a model trained on adult humans being fine tuned to generate a child human (fully clothed).
That's not something I can easily train for you ahaha
Yes, exactly! You're fine-tuning something with more data. How do you fine-tune adult porn models to create CP without CP data? If you do what you're saying you'll have adult bodies with child faces.
> That's not something I can easily train for you ahaha
Can you show me any example where such a thing has worked? I don't believe such an example exists.
You can use Stable Diffusion.
>If you do what you're saying you'll have adult bodies with child faces.
The body will be similar to petite people or similar to lolicon content traslated into "real life", it's not a far guess by the model.
The model do the same thing as with finetuning with my face, it understand that my images are the images of an adult male face and the knowledge will be added to the higher understanding of adult male and this include nudity, when you finetune on children it understand it's a human and it will added to the higher understanding of humans (And that includes nudity in various forms).
Maybe the model wouldn't be perfect with children, but it can't be with my nudes either, maybe I don't have nipples and the model doesn't know it; but the guesses that the model does are usually good enough to be considered realistic or plausible.
Yes, and as I've already told you, it doesn't work in Stable Diffusion, or at least I haven't seen any examples. Don't repeat this point again, show me an example.
> The body will be similar to petite people or similar to lolicon content traslated into "real life", it's not a far guess by the model.
Really? Show me an example. Don't just claim it, show me some place where this worked. You've mentioned fine-tuning a model with your face. Fine-tune a child model with your face and show me that it outputs something roughly adult-like. Or do the opposite and fine-tune an adult model with a child face and show me the model generates a small person. Show me that it's true, don't just claim it to be.
SD-based models can generate child bodies just fine, based on lots of training with non-porn images.
> Please show me a model trained on adult humans being fine tuned to generate a child human (fully clothed).
That's going to be hard in the SD space since there are, AFAIK, no models trained exclusively on adult humans (not even the base models), so you'd have to scratch-train a new base model to do this. (A model fine-tuned on adult images is still going to have the influence of base-model training, and unless massively overfit—usually very much an anti-goal, the exception being age-filter models whose entire focus is controlling apparent age [0]—will not have lost much of the generalization capability of the base model.)
The generalization abilities of models are good enough in other contexts that its plausible that realistic nude children could be generated by a model with no nude children in its training data that was otherwise trained on both clothed children and nude adults. I have no plans on testing this, however.
[0] e.g., https://civitai.com/models/65214?modelVersionId=74332
I have not stated anything contrary.
> The generalization abilities of models are good enough in other contexts that its plausible that realistic nude children could be generated by a model with no nude children in its training data that was otherwise trained on both clothed children and nude adults. I have no plans on testing this, however.
Stable Diffusion has failed me for much simpler interpolations than the one you're describing. I don't believe this would work based on previous interpolations I have seen in Stable Diffusion. You can convince me by showing an example, but not by stating that it is possible without one.
> Stable Diffusion has failed me for much simpler interpolations than the one you're describing
Its succeeded for me in much more complex ones. SD (even with the same exact set of checkpoint, LoRa, etc., and other workflow elements) isn't consistent across apparent-to-humans complexity levels in its generalization ability, and there are a very large combination of potential combinations.
> You can convince me by showing an example
Yeah, I'm not going to try to make simulated child porn for you, and while I would have sided with you in the debate over whether your earlier proof request amounted to a request for that, this one very clearly does.
Please, explain how I am "very clearly" asking for it. Please. Literally both sentences preceding the one you quoted (as in, the entire paragraph containing this sentence) are talking about interpolation. How do you jump from interpolation to CP??
In my opinion instances should let the user decide what they find problematic or not and unless it's just spam they shouldn't ban instances.
To me it's akin to encryption being used for illicit/illegal activities. Any tool that gives power to people can and will be abused by people you'd want nothing to do with.
What did you have in mind?
It all seems incredibly complex. Not a reason to "not try", but i suspect we'll struggle to implement even the most basic thing. And even then, take that basic thing and apply it to every software where users can input data.
Plus we'd have to convince everyone to do this. Automatic scanning and submission of data is not a well liked topic. Remember how Apple doing basic CSAM scanning was full of panic?
Even if a government _forced_ us to do this, jurisdiction alone would be a big question. Some serious questions that need some serious thought, imo. Is being hand-wavy even worth the time?
If it's so easy i'd love to see your implementation that works multi-language, across all media types, for all jurisdictions and hell handles burden all the massive number of edge cases.
Or frankly, any implementation. Whatever you think is easy and everyone should be doing - please point to an E2E implementation of it. Maybe i misunderstand your scope. Something where if a user submits CSAM, or does something to some country authority..?
there’s also negative prompting, which tells the model don’t do these things.
hallucinations can still happen but it’s much easier than you’re making it out to be.
I suspect we could use some sort of central management service for "Internet Reports". Ie to deal with jurisdictions, reporting something to the right people, etc, as well as the complexities involved with identifying people.
Either way i think you're underselling the complexity. Or maybe you think it's so easy but no one cares, /shrug. Seems a long list of questions i'd have before i could even begin to implement it.
I for one would much rather give pedophiles an opportunity to fulfil their sexual desires through AI-generated pictures than real ones.
Of course, we can talk about the training material. Are there actual child porn images in there? I seriously doubt it but who knows?
And perhaps a case could be made that AI-generated child porn could be a gateway to invite people who then seek out non-generated material.
But I think these are separate discussions to be had.
So if either case applies, whether it's training based on certain images, or it becomes a gateway, these are discussions to be had directly relating to whether or not it should be classified as abuse material.
Additionally, I'm not sure if the recommended help methods by professionals who deal with pedophiles is to let them fulfill their specific fantasies without a care.
There are lots of really important discussions to be had, but they're all tied to each other basically. We can't separate them out, nor should we aim to.
I just wanted to clarify that I did not mean that these topics are all unrelated. When I wrote that these are separate discussions to be had, I was rather trying to imply that these questions are important enough to deserve an own treatment. However, I do agree with you that in the end, they all contribute to the question whether or not artificially generated child porn is abusive or not.
I do appreciate another sibling comment that points out the relation to other fictional child porn, such as literary works.
Additionally, I would like to add another dimension to the topic, namely that IMO, there is often an unspoken underlying assumption that portraits consumers of child porn as (potential) predators. However, unlike a juvenile delinquent who might find it cool to break into a local corner shop at night to steal some cans of beer, pedophiles are usually not attracted to child porn as a matter of choice. Like many sexual preferences, it is often innate, and can also be a burden to them: imagine you know that what gets you on is morally wrong, even a crime, and for most of your life you are forced to suppress your real sexuality as a consequence.
I'm thinking that fictional child porn, even when it's not AI-based but perhaps created with photoshop or in form of stories, could potentially help pedophiles to find ways of somehow dealing with their sexuality without actually preying on innocent children.
However, all of these thoughts come from a very naive understanding of the subject matter. Neither am I a pedophile myself, nor do I know anyone who is, nor am I a psychologist or something who works in the field. So I am very interested in corrections or additional options - especially, as I pointed out before, if they are done in equally civil ways as they have been so far in this thread.
It’s kinda like arguing that racism is a fact of life for some and we should allow them to vent their racism in a controlled environment. Hard disagree.
So would it be okay to distribute "revenge porn" imagery after the subject has died?
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_status_of_fictional_porn...