[lazide]

You’re getting downvoted because it triggers some really deep ick feelings. Ick feelings that as a middle aged dude you’ve likely never had (or will likely have), so can’t appreciate. If you’ve had a crazy stalker (truly crazy), you’d probably think differently.

For instance, that Star Trek episode where Barclay was simulating the crew and having ‘relationships’ with them on the holodeck - in ‘real life’ the crew would have ostracized him, at the minimum.

In ‘real real life’, he might have just gotten murdered, ahem, ‘had a transporter accident’.

It’s similar. Yeah, logically ‘no one was getting hurt’, but people aren’t logical that way. For a reason, frankly.

And if you think of it as a prelude to something much more disturbing and direct happening (which it well might), then it makes sense to have the ‘disproportionate’/illogical reaction. Those emotions are warning people of an imminent threat, and they’d be fools to ignore them, regardless of what anyone says.

[int_19h]

I think it's perfectly reasonable to be grossed out by someone generating porn of other people without consent for their own personal consumption. But when it comes to legislation, surely that should be driven by harm assessment? Distribution of such images is clearly harmful and should be illegal, but I find it hard to come up with any reasonable arguments for criminalizing mere possession.

[lazide]

It’s just an expansion of the same rules as CSAM (which typically - but sometimes not for a short period of time in some locales - includes generated content).

I imagine it won’t be long before this is used to try to ban porn entirely, since ‘there is no way to be sure’. And then crack down on chat groups, social media, etc. since that is where any of the legit problematic content is going to be distributed most of the time eh?