[Aerroon]

Do you have this same social contract with drawing applications? Do you consider it a bug when someone manages to draw a gory image in Photoshop or GIMP?

I don't understand what's so difficult to understand about the idea that the user controls what is generated.

[tychez]

Or imagine drawing a nude in an art class.

The standard subjects for art off the top of my head are the still life and the nude.

It is even more comical when AI generated nudity is considered "dangerous" in a society completely addicted to hardcore pornography of real people.

[captainbland]

I think the main issue with transformer image generation in this respect is that not only can the image be explicit but also using it for this has an incredibly low effort cost and could photo-realistically depict a real living person and materially affect their life.

Whereas drawing applications have a natural barrier to achieving all of these together: time and skill.

[Aerroon]

>Whereas drawing applications have a natural barrier to achieving all of these together: time and skill.

Not necessarily, at least when it comes to nudity. Bubbling (image editing 'technique') is trivial to do and gives that same illusion.

Out of context speech and bad frames from a video can also materially affect someone's life, but we've more or less accepted it as part of life.

[interstice]

That's the world being deliberately created though, one where a mediocre but completely believable song is a prompt away. The scope of the side effects are across the entirety of what has previously taken time and effort until now.

[nozzlegear]

Is this a "guns don't kill people" argument wrapped up as a defense of non-deterministic image generators?

[allarm]

No it's not.