[LinuxBender]

I don't believe that is true. A woman and a child have distinct characteristics that are not interchangeable. A child for example can be detected by the shape of the nose and nostrils as just one data point. There are many more data-points that psycho-analysts use to determine if a person is attracted to children. AI would have to understand quite a bit of biology and understand how humans develop to get this right.

[Sharlin]

Image generation models are perfectly capable of mixing different concepts to create images of things they're incredibly unlikely to have seen during training.

[LinuxBender]

That sounds like a hit-or-miss concept to me. Without logic that teaches the AI why a child and an adult look the way they do it would maybe sometimes get it right by chance and other times not. I do not see how one could guarantee an outcome with the logic of the generation models unless it understands biology or was trained on real people which advertisements have no shortage of. Advertisements lack nudity and would leave out details like a hymen.

[charcircuit]

You can have artist draw art with the differences. And then you can get it via style transfer. But there are already many images of children with noses.

[jliptzin]

This is not a matter of opinion. Go to any AI image generator and tell it to generate whatever you want

[LinuxBender]

Opinions aside the question is how it learned to draw details about a child that do not exist on an adult and vice versa.