I thought America was for free speech/expression
>>534333240>republican is a pedoi'm shocked
how many democrats voted 'no'?
>>534333240Realistic AI depictions are not loli.
>>534333653zerotook me 20 drunken seconds to find out thanks to ai
How many pedos voted 'yes'?
>>534333240With AIs it's gonna be inevitable. Pedos will eventually be able to generate anything
This is a ridiculous invasion of privacy. Unless they ask the internet providers for the data, how would they know whats being done on your computer? God bless that republican that actually understands basic privacy and internet security
>>534334624I've already seen shit pop up in the Degen threads in /b/ that look totally convincing, they can do it already if they know how
>>534333240This isn't about loli, its a free speech issue. What happened to " I dont support you but I will fight for your right to say it?"
You'd have to be a dumbass to vote no on a bill to outlaw AI CP generation. Everyone's going to wonder WTF is wrong with you, especially if you look like a pervy low-T fag like that guy in OP's pic.
>>534333240>aiI don't care>tfAnd neither do you, chinese shill
>>534334912Jeets.>Huh? NO!Did you really think niggers were the worst possible thing for society? Whi inflicted us with niggers?Jews are jeets.
>>534334912Americans never actually believed in that, lol, try advocating to lower the age of consent on any major social media and see how long it takes you to get banned.
>>534334912There are exceptions. Universalist rules about things like this just leave loopholes for jews and other degenerates to exploit and that shouldn't be allowed.
>>534333240Ok... now what ELSE was in the bill? Is this another one of those "we name it only Good Things bill and if you don't like it you hate good things" but it actially has a lot of bad things in it?
>>534335294>jews and other degeneratesIn other words, people who hurt your feels, most of whom have no connection to Jews. Americans are hypocritical faggots who will go back on what they claimed to believe 5 minutes ago if they think it benefits them, they have no morals.
>>534335481I meant what I said - jews (often the source of such things) and degenerates that make society worse for normal people.You are jewish.
>>534335777>promote pedophiliaJews created feminism, which is responsible for raising the age of consent and pedohysteria culture. You're a fucking moron. Normal people are fucking morons and they never belonged on this site or on the internet in general.>ban free speechThis is literally what you're advocating for right now.>patriotsBoomer-tier faggotry, nobody under 50 gives a fuck about patriotism. America is an economic zone, not a country.>produce pornoPerhaps the only good thing Jews have ever done, as it gives men another option besides simping for some born-again tradwhore who's taken 5000 nigger dicks by age 20.
>>534336015>confused retard noisesYou almost get it. You're so close, but you're whining about your lack of self control instead of exerting self control.
>>534336238>self-important midwit noisesSelf-control is for fucking midwit faggots. Chad doesn't exercise any self-control and he's fantastically successful. Why wouldn't I want to be like that instead of some monk mode shit that there's no actual reason for?
>>534336307Please review the definitions of "fear" and "cowardice" in a readily available dictionary.
>>534336015So you admit all of these things are downstream of jewish interference with an otherwise healthy white society? Good, I'm glad we're in agreement.
>>534333240I don't care if AI is a pedo though. Here is a case where AI could keep pedos preoccupied in digital hell by giving them images of exactly what they want. I could imagine a future where pedos get googles bolted onto their heads and lie drooling all day in their cells like human batteries dreaming of whatever the fuck they please.
>>534333240How does banning AI generated images prevent harm to children? Preventing harm to actual children is the only legitimate justification to banning this stuff.
Nudity is NOT pornography. 17 year old CHILDREN are allowed into R-Rated and NC-17 films with full nudity. Furthermore, classic X-Rated such as They Call Her One Eye are about an underage teen being drugged & prostituted. NONE OF THIS IS PORNOGRAPHY OR THE DISTRIBUTION WOULD BE STOPPED AND SUED IMMEDIATELY
>>534337112>How does banning AI generated images prevent harm to children?People take pics of real kids and use image gen to pornify them.
>>534337512People also play call of duty to train for mass shootings. Should we ban call of duty?All this digital ID and AI regulation is to restrict freedom and say its for "protecting the kids." Meanwhile the people writing the bill rpaed kids on Epstein island.
>>534337646But at least they didn't film it!
>>534333240america hasn't been the land of the free since 1945, and more so since 1986, and especially since 2001
>>534337646Do you think it's acceptable to take an innocent picture of a kid and use an LLM to turn it into adderall-fueled gooner child porn?I'll defend lolicon all day, but once you cross the line from fake to real, that's it.Call of Duty is fake. Murder is real with real victims.Ichigo Mashimaru is fake. Child porn is real with real children.Not being able to understand this VERY IMPORTANT DISTINCTION is a clear sign of psychosis.I will never be okay with anyone victimizing prepubescent kids. Teenagers? IDGAF. Teenagers are adults IMO, fuck the law. But little kids? Hell no. Never. I have a line and it shall never be crossed. And that line is vitally important.
>>534337512But they do that in their own heads anyway.
>>534337951>Do you think it's acceptable to take an innocent picture of a kid and use an LLM to turn it into adderall-fueled gooner child porn?No. But why should it be illegal?Who is the victim?Who is harmed?For all I know, someone could have a billion AI nudes of me on their computer. So what?
>>534336238>>534336398Only faggots let things hold them back. The concepts of shit like self-control and introspection are woke modern inventions. None of the giants of industry ever took them seriously.
>>534338023>>534338071Picture this in your heads:Some pervert sees you out with your wife and daughter. Takes a picture of you guys without you knowing. Generates CP using your wife's and daughter's faces, and it goes onto the internet.So now, some perv goober can make child porn of your children, without even having to do any molestation or grooming or any of the dangerous work. But it's STILL child porn.How would you react to this as a father of the child in question if you found out? If you wouldn't want to kill the fucker that did that, you don't deserve to be a father. Because even my perverted ass would find that fucker and kill him. Or her, there are women that do this too, though rare.
>>534338280>But it's STILL child porn.It's functionally the same as shooping a kid's head onto Pamala Anderson's nude body.It's not real.>How would you react to this as a father of the child in question if you found out? If you wouldn't want to kill the fucker that did that, you don't deserve to be a father. Because even my perverted ass would find that fucker and kill him. Or her, there are women that do this too, though rare.That's fine? Being incredibly murderously pissed is a perfectly reasonable reaction.I don't see why that's an argument for making it illegal.
>>534338280thisyou have loligoddesses such as becky and rollbut thats not enough for youyou need to take a picture of a girl irl and generate cp from it because you are that sick more than everi knew ai was going to come to this and now its too late to stop it
>>534338439>It's functionally the same as shooping a kid's head onto Pamala Anderson's nude body.Except Pam doesn't have the body of an 8yo girl. An 8yo girl's head shopped onto a Baywatch body would not be goon bait for people that want child pornography.You see you're trying to have a philosophical debate, but you made a retarded argument. This is already illegal, federally. The US government banned this last year.People don't like this shit. Get over it. They are not going to allow it. In no world is this going to be legal to do.
>>534333240Based bald ginger cunnychad
>>534333240Nice that they can use this to curb public distribution, but it's 4-5 years too late. Pretty much any model can be steered into making it with a LoRA. If they really want to end this shit, start executing child predators publically and inhumanely. Let rabid dogs tear off their cocks and keep them alive artificially and when there is nothing left to tear off give em an adrenaline shot and then burn them alive. Oh yeah and start with every cretin nonce on "the list".
>>534338766>Except Pam doesn't have the body of an 8yo girl. An 8yo girl's head shopped onto a Baywatch body would not be goon bait for people that want child pornography.I'll have to bow to your expertise on that.>You see you're trying to have a philosophical debate, but you made a retarded argument. This is already illegal, federally. The US government banned this last year.That's a classic appeal to authority fallacy.>People don't like this shit. Get over it. They are not going to allow it. In no world is this going to be legal to do.There's a lot of things people don't like, but that's no reason to make it illegal.You're upset by this very specific kind of image for some reason.Are AI images of violence to children fine?Does any kind of upsetting image deserve to be illegal?Where's the line?You don't seem to have thought this through at all.
>>534339196>Where's the line?There isn't one, why would there be?
>>534339324Are you saying all upsetting AI images should be illegal then?I'm asking what line separates legal yet upsetting images from illegal ones.
>>534339196>>534339366The line, it taking a real child and using image data to create pornography. This victimizes the child. How is this a hard concept for you?
>>534333240A hero stood that day. King Arthur has returned
>>534334912>I dont support you but I will fight for your right to say it?slippery slope to get to this point
>>534339661Well firstly, I don't see what actual harm comes to the child.But more to my previous point, should it also be illegal to make an AI image of violence to that child?Murdering children is probably at least as bad as taking nudes of them, right?And yet, the pornography issue is uniquely emotional to people, and bypasses logic.
>>534333529Me too, 99% of the time it's liberals. Gotta be careful anon.
>>534333945What if someone can draw hyper realistic child porn?
>>534339781>should it also be illegal to make an AI image of violence to that child?As in a real child that actually exists? In my opinion, yes. I understand human nature. And without lines in the sand, people quickly degenerate into feral behavior. That line in the sand is fiction vs. reality. We get enough horrifying images of gore from wars and murder scenes. No need to allow people to make a bunch more of that shit.
>>534339366Nothing separates them. They are all equal, its just images
>>534340025>As in a real child that actually exists? In my opinion, yes.You seem a lot less certain and emotionally charged about that issue.Curious.>We get enough horrifying images of gore from wars and murder scenes. Should that be illegal too?
Drawing The Prophet Muhammad (may piss be upon him) is ok but realistic depictions of Muhammad is haram
>>534340147You're not understanding the issue. Since 4chan has a lot of autists and other morally-confused users, I can tell that further arguing of this is fruitless, because I can't get through that brick head of yours. And I don't have the rest of the night to debate this.It's illegal, it was always going to be illegal, and it will never not be illegal. You don't have to understand or like this, but that's the way it goes. I accepted drugs are illegal and will always be illegal long ago. Get over it.
>>534340500lol
>>534338178>the nigger only thinks in the moment
>>534333240>Middle Aged White MenEvery Single Time
>>534333529Its a matter of creeping governmental control. AI images are not humans, never were and never will be. If you can make literal art illegal that kicks off "bad art" like political themes
is realistic depictions of a child not already illegal? what tyrannical shit did they include in that bill
>>534333240How are the going to stop local models from making those images? Will local models have to connect to a government server to get approval before fulfilling a prompt?
>>534333240>groom children into homosexuality and cutting their dicks/tits off?Fuck yes!!!>Masturbating to AI porn that depicts a woman under 18Kill this man! Shame his family! rawr!America has weird fucking ideals man.
>>534333240>one man stood for 1776
>>534334912Ah, what is it exactly you can't say without AI-generated photorealistic child porn?
>>534343807Why does anyone get to decide non-human art is illegal? thats the only question that matters here. On who's authority is entirely synthetic imagery illegal. And why. Because it offends someone? Lots of things offend someone. Doesnt matter
>>534333240Democracy is ultimately feminine. You seek consensus and shame those who stray.
