As it shows, the harm depends a lot on the person. But anyway, whoever consumes it consents to it, so I see no reason for a government side ban, beyond age restrictions that usually are already in place (but care has to be taken to not enforce age restriction in a way causing much bigger harm - because the last thing we need is a government database tracking who watches which porn).
In addition, it comprises a major part of Internet traffic, also because unlike e.g. Netflix and YouTube, it is not cached on your ISP's premises and thus actually goes through the backbone and peering. This harm is real, but of course, is one the ISPs could easily fix if they wanted to.
@Suiseiseki@lamp And yes, in case of OC the copyright/trademark issue of course is taken care of (except that the authors themselves may get their copyright infringed by others).
@Suiseiseki@lamp What I meant is, such models can also be trained just from "harmless" pictures of minors, and "adult" porn. If one really needs that kinda stuff. In that case no real person has been harmed.
If a model has been trained using real CSAI, then yes, the entire model should of course still be illegal to distribute with massive consequences, as doing so still perpetuated harm to actual children depicted in training data. As for pictures generated by said models, it is more complicated, as it ultimately depends on whether or not a real person can be recognized (and yes, this raises to the level where someone thought they "just used AI" and had no intention of harming a real child, but the model was massively overfit and always generated the same child).
But yeah, waste of investigators' resources is also an issue, but should not be a reason to ban something. Get gud at investigating, I guess.
@Suiseiseki@lamp To be fair, in part the words are simply confused by people who do not know what they mean.
No one wants a child molester. But not every pedophile is a child molester, and - indeed as you say - vice versa.
And if someone distributes real CSAI, they are indeed increasing the damage that has already happened to the children depicted. That does need to be punished.
But we live in 2025. There are not just hand drawn pictures, you can even generate that sick stuff with AI - even using models that have not been trained with real CSAI, but work in a "transfer" like approach. Where nobody is actually being harmed except for the viewer, I guess.
And if someone "uses" that... well that is still sick, but know what? I don't care.
@Suiseiseki@mwl Well, the software is to blame, as the perspective on the mural does not move correctly. Same way as a human would notice it. But that requires cross frame analysis. That is much more complex, and also, fog.
@puniko@fineblackink@Thunfischer Aber viel wichtiger, das große, dass man beim Schreiben in GROẞBUCHSTABEN braucht, ist noch nicht einmal auf der _deutschen_ Tastatur... bzw. es ist im T2-Layout, aber so eine Tastatur habe ich noch nie im Leben gesehen.
@kravietz My problem with GDPR is the opposite - namely how it harms big corporations least.
For example, me running a SSH server on my personal vserver became technically illegal as the SSH protocol does not support the necessary disclosures, and happily logs every login attempt to the system log (where it tends to age out after 7 days as no one ever looks there anyway unless something is wrong).
I am aware that this kind of log would be permitted under the GDPR if it were properly disclosed. I would also be required to disclose my home address to the entire world just because I run SSH.
IMHO the very least GDPR should have done would be an exclusion so entities that do not use data in a way that requires explicit permission do not need to comply with the disclosure, legal entity etc. requirements. Maybe further conditioned by not making any profit.
- SSH port is open to anyone. - Anyone who connects to it - and be it by entering http://ipaddress:22 in the browser address bar - will cause log lines to be written. - The logging includes the source IP address, which is generally considered PII.
As such, it quite obviously falls into the scope of the GDPR.
As for the logging of the IPs itself, that clearly falls under "legitimate interest" as per Article 6(1) GDPR - so that is fine per se.
Art. 13 GDPR is the real problem with SSH - the right to be informed. The protocol doesn't even provide a _way_ for the connecting individual to be informed about these things.
Clearly the authors of the GDPR did not _intend_ to place 20 million EUR penalties on private individuals who happen to run a vserver with SSH access. And I also presume it won't actually be _applied_ like that. But ultimately it depends on whether someone will file a GDPR compliant, and how the DPA will treat that report. I suppose unless a wild #Gravenreuth appears, people should be safe.
@adamshostack Actually, if OpenSSL were a GUI, it'd look like this. Seemingly small window with few options - until you start doing anything with it. Then it'll just overwhelm you with a 3 pages long menu.
Software engineer. Mathematics major. All programming languages are bad.In free time, game developer; main titles: #AAAAXY, #Xonotic, #Nexuiz.Super Mario Maker troll fan (i.e. I enjoy watching streamers suffer).Primary: @divVerent@misskey.de