Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (Darkly)
  • No Skin
Collapse

Chebucto Regional Softball Club

  1. Home
  2. Uncategorized
  3. 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'
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'

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Uncategorized
games
218 Posts 110 Posters 130 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • ? Guest
    And abuse is a different word than rape. Maybe meditate on that
    M This user is from outside of this forum
    M This user is from outside of this forum
    mindbleach@sh.itjust.works
    wrote last edited by
    #61
    And what if neither happened?
    ? 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • ? Guest
      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.
      shani66@ani.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
      shani66@ani.socialS This user is from outside of this forum
      shani66@ani.social
      wrote last edited by
      #62
      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.
      ? 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • M mindbleach@sh.itjust.works
        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.*
        MaestroM This user is from outside of this forum
        MaestroM This user is from outside of this forum
        Maestro
        wrote last edited by
        #63
        When all her friends and family see that image, she is definitely involved. And it's definitely abuse.
        1 Reply Last reply
        1
        0
        • M mindbleach@sh.itjust.works
          AI can draw Shrek on the moon. Do you think it needed real images of that?
          ? Offline
          ? Offline
          Guest
          wrote last edited by
          #64
          It used real images of shrek and the moon to do that. It didnt "invent" or "imagine" either. The child porn it's generating is based on literal child porn, if not itself just actual child porn.
          M 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • ? Guest
            It used real images of shrek and the moon to do that. It didnt "invent" or "imagine" either. The child porn it's generating is based on literal child porn, if not itself just actual child porn.
            M This user is from outside of this forum
            M This user is from outside of this forum
            mindbleach@sh.itjust.works
            wrote last edited by
            #65
            You think these billion-dollar companies keep hyper-illegal images around, just to train their hideously expensive models to do the things they do not want those models to do?
            S ? ? 3 Replies Last reply
            1
            0
            • M This user is from outside of this forum
              M This user is from outside of this forum
              mindbleach@sh.itjust.works
              wrote last edited by
              #66
              Does a depiction of her corpse mean she's dead?
              C 1 Reply Last reply
              1
              0
              • M mindbleach@sh.itjust.works
                You think these billion-dollar companies keep hyper-illegal images around, just to train their hideously expensive models to do the things they do not want those models to do?
                S This user is from outside of this forum
                S This user is from outside of this forum
                stray@pawb.social
                wrote last edited by
                #67
                It literally can't combine unrelated concepts though. Not too long ago there was the issue where one (Dall-E?) couldn't make a picture of a full glass of wine because every glass of wine it had been trained on was half full, because that's generally how we prefer to photograph wine. It has no concept of "full" the way actual intelligences do, so it couldn't connect the dots. It had to be trained on actual full glasses of wine to gain the ability to produce them itself.
                M 1 Reply Last reply
                1
                0
                • R retrogoblet79@eviltoast.org
                  This post did not contain any content.
                  ? Offline
                  ? Offline
                  Guest
                  wrote last edited by
                  #68
                  >steam >does nothing >wins
                  1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • S stray@pawb.social
                    It literally can't combine unrelated concepts though. Not too long ago there was the issue where one (Dall-E?) couldn't make a picture of a full glass of wine because every glass of wine it had been trained on was half full, because that's generally how we prefer to photograph wine. It has no concept of "full" the way actual intelligences do, so it couldn't connect the dots. It had to be trained on actual full glasses of wine to gain the ability to produce them itself.
                    M This user is from outside of this forum
                    M This user is from outside of this forum
                    mindbleach@sh.itjust.works
                    wrote last edited by
                    #69
                    And you think it's short on images of fully naked women?
                    S 1 Reply Last reply
                    1
                    0
                    • R retrogoblet79@eviltoast.org
                      This post did not contain any content.
                      C This user is from outside of this forum
                      C This user is from outside of this forum
                      cancermancer@sh.itjust.works
                      wrote last edited by
                      #70
                      Guy atomically made of shit takes has another shit take, colour me surprised.
                      ? 1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • M mindbleach@sh.itjust.works
                        Does a depiction of her corpse mean she's dead?
                        C This user is from outside of this forum
                        C This user is from outside of this forum
                        cancermancer@sh.itjust.works
                        wrote last edited by
                        #71
                        False equivalence.
                        M 1 Reply Last reply
                        1
                        0
                        • C cancermancer@sh.itjust.works
                          False equivalence.
                          M This user is from outside of this forum
                          M This user is from outside of this forum
                          mindbleach@sh.itjust.works
                          wrote last edited by
                          #72
                          The central goddamn point. *Depicting* things happening does not mean they *actually happened.* The entire point of the term CSAM is to describe crimes which literally occurred. It is material... from the sexual abuse... of children. Do y'all not understand why it's kinda fuckin' important to have a term for that specific concept?
                          C 1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • M mindbleach@sh.itjust.works
                            The central goddamn point. *Depicting* things happening does not mean they *actually happened.* The entire point of the term CSAM is to describe crimes which literally occurred. It is material... from the sexual abuse... of children. Do y'all not understand why it's kinda fuckin' important to have a term for that specific concept?
                            C This user is from outside of this forum
                            C This user is from outside of this forum
                            cancermancer@sh.itjust.works
                            wrote last edited by
                            #73
                            Do you think that generated depictions of the sexual abuse of children are ok in any context?
                            M 1 Reply Last reply
                            1
                            0
                            • M mindbleach@sh.itjust.works
                              You think these billion-dollar companies keep hyper-illegal images around, just to train their hideously expensive models to do the things they do not want those models to do?
                              ? Offline
                              ? Offline
                              Guest
                              wrote last edited by
                              #74
                              No, I think these billion dollar companies are incredibly sloppy about curating the content they steal to train their systems on.
                              M 1 Reply Last reply
                              1
                              0
                              • C cancermancer@sh.itjust.works
                                Guy atomically made of shit takes has another shit take, colour me surprised.
                                ? Offline
                                ? Offline
                                Guest
                                wrote last edited by
                                #75
                                I think it's more a: "Guy who enjoys making child porn on xhitter gets angry when decent people want to ban it." type situation. If I see someone arguing for something then that's because they want it. Or want to use it.
                                1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • R retrogoblet79@eviltoast.org
                                  This post did not contain any content.
                                  ? Offline
                                  ? Offline
                                  Guest
                                  wrote last edited by
                                  #76
                                  Did he take an oath against common sense? Is he bound by a curse to have bad takes for his entire life? Does he ragebait as a living? What the actual fuck is up with this dude?
                                  ? ? 2 Replies Last reply
                                  0
                                  • R retrogoblet79@eviltoast.org
                                    This post did not contain any content.
                                    ? Offline
                                    ? Offline
                                    Guest
                                    wrote last edited by
                                    #77
                                    What a reprehensible, disingenuous representation of what he actually said. I'm not a fan of the guy, but PC Gamer is trash as well. Scary to see how people here are reacting just because it's about X and AI.
                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • R retrogoblet79@eviltoast.org
                                      This post did not contain any content.
                                      ? Offline
                                      ? Offline
                                      Guest
                                      wrote last edited by
                                      #78
                                      Man that title gives me a stroke trying to decipher it.. it almost reads like Tim Sweeney wants Twitter banned but clearly that’s not the case..
                                      ? 1 Reply Last reply
                                      1
                                      0
                                      • R retrogoblet79@eviltoast.org
                                        This post did not contain any content.
                                        ? Offline
                                        ? Offline
                                        Guest
                                        wrote last edited by
                                        #79
                                        Literally this meme again ![](https://media.piefed.ca/posts/gF/dP/gFdP084Q14ddxyF.jpeg)
                                        ? ? merc@sh.itjust.worksM ? 4 Replies Last reply
                                        0
                                        • R retrogoblet79@eviltoast.org
                                          This post did not contain any content.
                                          ? Offline
                                          ? Offline
                                          Guest
                                          wrote last edited by
                                          #80
                                          What a weird thing to saw by the man whose company is 35% owned by the Chinese government. His argument, the words said and not implied, isn’t directly about csam, it’s about political censorship. Wonder how his Chinese overlords are taking that statement.
                                          1 Reply Last reply
                                          1
                                          0

                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • 1
                                          • 2
                                          • 3
                                          • 4
                                          • 5
                                          • 6
                                          • 10
                                          • 11
                                          • Login

                                          • Don't have an account? Register

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          Powered by NodeBB Contributors
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Tags
                                          • Popular
                                          • World
                                          • Users
                                          • Groups