[sebosp]

I'm gonna ask something awful, but isn't this the end of child porn? It's sad but isn't it the least painful option? I wish it would then lead the people that need mental health to a professional, hell, couldn't we engineer an ai that progressively guides their misguided patterns to an acceptable level? (assuming such a thing exists)

[elorant]

It’s not awful because it has been addressed before. Sure, if you can create child porn at your demand there’s no reason to go look for the real thing, at least in theory.

There are a couple of problems though. How would the model be trained? It has to process child faces. This is a huge red flag by itself. The second problem is that it might get more people addicted to child porn. If it becomes so easy to access who can tell how many more will find it attractive. And then you’ll end up with a much bigger problem than the one you had when started.

[ramblerman]

> The second problem is that it might get more people addicted to child porn

Would you similarly argue gay porn is likely to make more people gay?

[archon1410]

I think many people would agree to that sentiment. Anecdotally, the number of people who identify as gay or bisexual and/or are interested in same-sex sex has only increased tremendously as the amount of gay pornography has increased.

Arguably much of it only due to destigmatisation and legislation. But even then it only seems obvious that many people who would otherwise have lived "straight lives" have been "introduced" to homosexuality due to gay porn, as the number of "this makes me question my sexuality" comments under various gay-erotic content show.

[elorant]

Not gay per se, more like bisexuals.

[jstarfish]

> The second problem is that it might get more people addicted to child porn.

Nah, the second problem is escalation.

The fear is that once you've burned out on fakes, you start looking for the real stuff (or physical encounters) to get your dopamine fix.

[luckylion]

> If it becomes so easy to access who can tell how many more will find it attractive.

The same argument is regularly brought up around drugs. Modifying chemical formulas brings out stuff like 1P-LSD, which is a functional analogue of LSD, but has been legal in lots of countries for years because it wasn't covered by the existing laws. With that argument, you'd expect everyone and their aunt to be tripping, but we didn't. There's a subculture that is interested in psychotropic drugs, but it's small, and availability doesn't increase it.

[sh4rks]

Exactly. As morbid as it is, people might eventually get bored of the fake stuff and might crave (or even fetishize) the "real" stuff.

[IIAOPSW]

That's not awful at all its just a topic that makes people queasy, and an outcome which blueballs those who are into hating pedos first and protecting children as an afterthought.

[ThinkBeat]

No. Creating child porn, be it drawings, written, or AI is illegal. (even though no real person was involved at any stage).

Buying a sex doll with proportions that are closer to a child than an adult is also illegal.

Given that some sex dolls are partial. (not the entire legs for example) the difference can get murky

My references here are to Norwgian law.

[exolymph]

> Creating child porn, be it drawings, written, or AI is illegal.

In the US this is not true.

[sheepdestroyer]

Drawings (in manga form for instance) depicting underage sex are considered child pornography in many jurisdictions. Prison sentences are given for having it. AI generated cp is most certainly also cp.

[Serenacula]

It has been argued that YouTube does this in reverse, so probably.

[tennisflyi]

No. The real stuff will just fetch a premium.