[lokar]

You often see (appropriately, IMO) a certain amount of discretion wrt prosecution when things are changing quickly.

I doubt anyone will go to jail over this. What (I think) should happen is state or federal law enforcement need to make it very clear to Xai (and the others) that this is unacceptable, and that if it keep happening, and you are not showing that you are fixing it (even if that means some degradation in the capability of the system/service), then you will be charged.

One of the strengths of the western legal system that I think is under appreciated by people here is that it is subject to interpretation. Law is not Code. This makes it flexible to deal with new situations, and this is (IME) always accompanied by at least a small amount of discretion in enforcement. And in the end, the laws and how they are interpreted and enforced are subject to democratic forces.

[ls612]

When the GP said “not possible” they were referring to the strict letter of the law that I was, not to your lower standard of “make a good effort to fix it”. Law is not code because that gives the lawgivers discretion to exercise power arbitrarily while convincing the citizens that they live under the “rule of law”. At least the Chinese for all their faults don’t bother with the pretense.

[chrisjj]

> When the GP said “not possible” they were referring to the strict letter of the law that I was

I, the GP, was referring to what I quoted:

“AI products must be tested rigorously before they go to market to ensure they do not have the capability to generate this material [CSAM],” and I agree this is in effect the law at least here in UK.

[lokar]

If you reject the foundation of liberal western civilization I don’t know what to tell you.

Move to china?

[ls612]

I’m just pointing out how the world works in real life not saying that it is desirable. Thinking in terms of that distinction is very useful.