it can be difficult if not impossible for law enforcement officials to distinguish between images of real and fake children.
Exactly this! If you cannot deem it real or not then it should just be banned entirely.
4 Matching Annotations
- Last 7 days
-
theconversation.com theconversation.com
-
-
The court’s decision stated that these digitally altered sexually explicit depictions of minors “implicate the interests of real children and are in that sense closer to the images in Ferber.”
Exactly my point from earlier
-
The government’s interest in protecting the physical and psychological well-being of children, the court found, was not implicated when such obscene material is computer generated. “Virtual child pornography is not ‘intrinsically related’ to the sexual abuse of children,” the court wrote.
Now I see the complexity of the argument. Because it is AI it does not display a real child. However I would argue that if you could create this you have the means to involve an actual child later.
An example a person threatens to kill another person. They don't actually kill the person, but they can still get in trouble with the law for the threat. They may not be charged with murder but there is still accountability. I think you could something similar in this scenario.
They technically still have possession of child porn which is illegal involving a real child or an AI generated. Also technically speaking all porn is created or produced for creative, imaginative purposes. That being said, an AI child is not far off.
-
almost certainly falls under the scope of that ruling.
I wouldn't just say almost. I would argue that it absolutely does. If child pornographic images is illegal, its arguable that creating them is just as illegal because you still have possession at that point.
-