you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 28 points 1 day ago (5 children)

What do you think it was trained on to be able to create child porn? Yes, children were harmed and will continue to be harmed to “improve the model”

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 20 hours ago

    The model knows what kids looks like and it knows what porn looks like. It is now more complex than the thought experiment, “the Chinese Room” because it can interpolate between two things it knows rather than basic request and response.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 day ago* (1 child)

    Were they also trained on the vast quantity of media of gymnasts made out of pasta for them to be able to create videos of that?

    One of the main points of GenAI is the ability to smush multiple concepts together. There are plenty of training data of children that are in swimwear, or just literally naked that has nothing to do with CP, and there's boatloads naked adults and of course, porn, it can successfully combine them together even if there was no actual CP in there whatsoever.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 20 hours ago

    And given the internet's proclivity toward legal "teen/jailbait" porn where the models are of age but focus heavily on child-like features/poses/clothing/etc, there's literally millions of high-resolution photos that an inference machine could easily stitch together a CSAM image using nothing but legal source images.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -2 points 22 hours ago

    What? Even if you're right that CSAM was included in training data (and that's highly debated), it would absolutely have been inadvertent and due to the Internet dragnet style of training. I don't know where you get the idea that AI companies would ask for more CSAM and drive up demand to "improve" their model.

  • source
  • parent