You’re the only one using that definition.

How do you think a child would feel after having a pornographic image generated of them and then published on the internet? Looks like sexual abuse to me.

Your likeness depicted on the moon does not mean you went to the moon.

Isn't it abuse if i take a picture of a girl, let grok remove the clothes and post this online?

Your kindness modified naked being fucked, printed out and stapled to a tree in your neighborhood is ok then?

HAHAHAHA Just stop the corn bro... IS everything the lowest common denominator... beatin meat.... I don't eat when I sh!+... Like time and place.... Tim you a straight arse ladder pulling enshittificating boomer reprobate. This pud skims the surface like the scum that he is. One day the master race will get all the gold coins and build a circus that no one can afford. Finger crossed!!! Nukes_2026

My definition is from *what words mean.* We need a term to specifically refer to actual photographs of actual child abuse. What the fuck are we supposed to call that, such that schmucks won't use the same label to refer to drawings?

A threat of murder is a crime without being the same thing as murder. Meditate on this.

Maybe we are the only people that don't f kids. Maybe this is "H' "E" Double Hockey Sticks.

It's a crime, but it's not the same crime as taking the actual clothes off the actual girl. She was not physically abused. She was not even *involved.*

> The Rape, Abuse, & Incest National Network (RAINN) defines child sexual abuse material (CSAM) as "evidence of child sexual abuse" that "includes both real and synthetic content Were you too busy fapping to read the article?

AI CSAM was generated from real CSAM AI being able to accurately undress kids is a real issue in multiple ways

I mean the capitalist are the ones calling the shots since the imperial core is no democracy. This is their battle we are their dildos.

> The Rape, Abuse, & Incest National Network (RAINN) defines child sexual abuse material (CSAM) as "evidence of child sexual abuse" that "includes both real and synthetic content

AI can draw Shrek on the moon. Do you think it needed real images of that?

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.

And abuse is a different word than rape. Maybe meditate on that

And what if neither happened?

Sure, i think it's weird to really care about loli or furry or any other *niche*, but ai generating material of actual children (and unwilling people besides) is actually harmful. If they can't have effective safeguards against that harm it makes sense to restrict it legally.

When all her friends and family see that image, she is definitely involved. And it's definitely abuse.