A forum for discussing and organizing recreational softball and baseball games and leagues in the greater Halifax area.
Epic Games CEO Tim Sweeney argues banning Twitter over its ability to AI-generate pornographic images of minors is just 'gatekeepers' attempting to 'censor all of their political opponents'
-
This post did not contain any content.This is almost as sus as the the specific preferred age range terminology for pedophiles that comes up now and again in the most uncomfortable of scenarios
-
Please send me pictures of your mom so that I may draw her naked and post it on the internet.Do you understand that's a different thing than telling me you've fucked her?
-
I already did the “what words mean” thing earlier. -involves a child -is sexual -is abusive (ie, not art) -is material That’s literally every word of CSAM, and it fits. >We need a term to specifically refer to actual photographs of actual child abuse? Why? You’ve made a whole lot of claims it should be your way but you’ve provided no sources nor any justification as to why we need to delineate between real and AI.Are you honestly asking me why child molestation is worse than rendering an image? This term was already developed to distinguish evidence of criminal events. I should fucking hope everyone here understands why preventing or punishing such events is a leading goal, but apparently that's asking too much, if y'all really do not believe there's a difference between pasting someone's head onto a magazine centerfold... versus sexually assaulting them. I am fucking bewildered by this lack of consensus on the topic of *child rape.* Really thought it was a gimme, for everyone to go, yeah, this thing over here is bad, but obviously it's not as bad as *child rape.* Didn't expect to fire up the computer and have Lemmings sincerely ask me, why are crimes that happened worse than crimes that didn't?
-
This post did not contain any content.Zionazi oligarchist supremacism controlling media/speech promoting hate and genocide is reason to zero out his finances and media control. That bipartisan establishment loves all of this, means this performative whining over image generation tools that can be used to fake offense, is the permitted pathethic discourse establishment masquerades as democracy.
-
This post did not contain any content.I'm no fan of banning this or that particular platform (it's like trying to get rid of cheeseburgers by banning McDonalds; the burgers are still available from all the other burger chains and all the people who use the one will just switch to others) but this is a hilariously wrong way to get to the right answer.
-
I get this and I don't disagree, but I also hate that AI fully brought back thought crimes as a thing. I don't have a better approach or idea, but I really don't like that simply drawing a certain arrangement of lines and colors is now a crime. I've also seen a lot of positive sentiment at applying this to other forms of porn as well, ones less universally hated. Not supporting this use case at all and on balance I think this is the best option we have, but I do think thought crimes as a concept are just as concerning, especially given the current political climate.> I really don’t like that simply drawing a certain arrangement of lines and colors is now a crime I'm sorry to break it to you, but this has been illegal for a long time and it doesn't need to have anything to do with CSAM. For instance, drawing certain copyrighted material in certain contexts can be illegal. To go even further, numbers and maths can be illegal in the right circumstances. For instance, it may be illegal where you live to break the encryption of a certain file, depending on the file and encryption in question (e.g. DRM on copyrighted material). "Breaking the encryption of a file" essentially translates to "doing maths on a number" when you boil it down. That's how you can end up with the concept of [illegal numbers](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illegal_number).
-
It helps that Tim Sweeney seems to always be wrong about everything.
-
Dude, you're just wrong. There seems to be a huge disconnect with you between what the law is. And what you want the law to be. You are not allowed to take an image of someone, photoshop them naked, and distributed it. Period. You are also not allowed to depict child sexual abuse. It doesn't matter if it's not real. It's the depiction of CSA taking place that is illegal.Depictions could somehow be twice as illegal as the real event, and they still wouldn't be the same thing. It literally did not take place.
-
This post did not contain any content.
-
This post did not contain any content.
-
Nobody was talking about the "legality". We are talking about morals. And morally there is major difference.Talking about morals and morality is how you end up getting things like abortion banned. Because some people felt morally superior and wanted to enforce their superior morality on everyone else. There's no point in bringing it up. If you need to bring up morals to argue your point. You've already failed. But please do enlighten me. Because personally. I don't think there's a moral difference between depicting "victimless" CSAM and CSAM containing a real person. I think they're both, morally, equally awful. But you said there's a major moral difference? For you maybe.
-
This post did not contain any content.
-
This post did not contain any content.Who else just did a search on the Epstein files for "Tim Sweeney"? I didn't find anything on [jmail](https://www.jmail.world/), but there's still a lot that haven't been released, and a lot of stuff is still redacted.
-
This post did not contain any content.
-
This post did not contain any content.
-
This post did not contain any content.Did Covid-19 make everyone lose their minds? This isn't even about being cruel or egotistical. This is just a stupid thing to say. Has the world lost the concept of PR??? Genuinely defending 𝕏 in the year 2026... for Deepfake porn including of minors!!???? From the Fortnite company guy???
-
Did Covid-19 make everyone lose their minds? This isn't even about being cruel or egotistical. This is just a stupid thing to say. Has the world lost the concept of PR??? Genuinely defending 𝕏 in the year 2026... for Deepfake porn including of minors!!???? From the Fortnite company guy???
-
Nobody was talking about the "legality". We are talking about morals. And morally there is major difference.I wish I was as composed as you. You're still calmly explaining things to that dumb fuck, while they move the goalposts back and forth: * first [they lie I was saying there were no victims](https://sh.itjust.works/post/53258921/23148352); * then they backpedal and say ["It doesn’t matter if there’s a victim or not. It’s the depiction of CSA that is illegal."](https://sh.itjust.works/post/53258921/23154046); * then they backpedal *again* and say what boils down to ["talking about morals bad! Also I'll talk about MY morals. I don't see moral difference when people are harmed and when they're not"](https://sh.itjust.works/post/53258921/23159319) (inb4 I'm abridging it) All of that while they're still pretending to argue the same point. It reminds me a video from the Alt-Right Playbook, called ["never play defence"](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wmVkJvieaOA&list=PLJA_jUddXvY7v0VkYRbANnTnzkA_HMFtQ&index=3): make dumb claim, waste someone else's time expecting them to rebuke that dumb claim, make another dumb claim, waste their time again, so goes on.
-
Yes, it certainly comes across as you arguing for the opposite since you above, reiterated >The real thing to talk about is the presence or absence of a victim. Which has never been an issue. It has never mattered in CSAM if it's fictional or not. It's the depiction that is illegal.>Yes, it certainly comes across as you arguing for the opposite No, it does not. Stop being a liar.
-
This post did not contain any content.TIL Tim Sweeney doesn't know what gatekeeping is
![Lvxferre [he/him]](https://mander.xyz/pictrs/image/333d03a0-bcae-434b-a8d1-7dfd18962d20.jpeg "Lvxferre [he/him]"){kind=avatar}