Comment on US man used AI to generate 13,000 child sexual abuse pictures, FBI alleges

• Jimmyeatsausage@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

  It’s not child sexual assault if there was no abuse. However, the legal definition of csam is any visual depiction, including computer or computer-generated images of sexually explicit conduct, where […]— (A) the production of such visual depiction involves the use of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct; (B) such visual depiction is a digital image, computer image, or computer-generated image that is, or is indistinguishable from, that of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct; or © such visual depiction has been created, adapted, or modified to appear that an identifiable minor is engaging in sexually explicit conduct.

  You may not agree with that definition, but even simulated images that look like kids engaging in sexual activity meet the threshold for CSAM.

  source
• possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

  Yes it is

  CSAM is child pornography

  source

  • JackGreenEarth@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

    Do you not know that CSAM is an acronym that stands for child sexual abuse material?

    source

    • possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

      True but CSAM is anything that involves minors. Its really up to the court to decide a lot of it but in the case above I’d imagine that the images were quite disturbing.

      source
  • ASeriesOfPoorChoices@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

    in this instance, no human children or minors of any kind were involved.

    source

    • possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

      I think the court looked at the phycological aspects of it. When you look at that kind of material you are training your brain and body to be attracted to that stuff in real life.

      source

      • ASeriesOfPoorChoices@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

        prove that any “training” is involved, please.

        source