Personally I think they're completely ethically fine, as long as it's not directly based on a specific child (like an actress or whatever). It feels like "vegan pedophilia": completely harm-free lol
There's been some really impressive strides with various secret sites and even full magazines and stuff (which I'm not clear if I'm allowed to mention by name)
What's your opinions on this stuff?
Extrapolating on current trends, seems as though the 'market' will eventually be flooded with AI child porn images. To the point where if someone sees a picture of a naked child, they're going to assume it's fake. Because 99% of the time, they'll be right. Might even get to the point where people won't even believe that a real CP pic isn't AI. Even if it's from 20 years ago.
"Naw dude, that's fake."
"But it's April. AI didn't exist when these were taken."
"Nope, fake."
Am I ok with it from a moral perspective? Oh hell yeah, and probably most people are, even non-pedos. I think OTR is correct in the sense that there will be a lot of AI generated images, and eventually people won't be able to tell the difference, but so what? If they fulfill their objective then who cares? For now I think it's pretty obvious which images are real and which are AI generated.
Quote from: on the rocks on 11 January, 2025, 01:38:37Extrapolating on current trends, seems as though the 'market' will eventually be flooded with AI child porn images. To the point where if someone sees a picture of a naked child, they're going to assume it's fake. Because 99% of the time, they'll be right. Might even get to the point where people won't even believe that a real CP pic isn't AI. Even if it's from 20 years ago.
"Naw dude, that's fake."
"But it's April. AI didn't exist when these were taken."
"Nope, fake."
That scenario is why governments will treat it all like real CP.
Yes, I would be :)
I would be perfectly fine if we landed at a place where all CP content was AI generated. It could be anything from basic softcore images to hurtcore movies of toddlers getting fucked. None of it would be real and no kids would be harmed. Would this content lead to more contact with kids? This is hard to determine. I think it will lead to more people getting attracted to kids though because there will be so much content out there.
I guess it's only a matter of time until people would start making AI generated CP with 'models' that look like kids they know in real life. Just upload one pic and let the AI do the rest.
Next step is to combine that with some 4 or 5D VR-set-up.
I'm ok with it. It doesn't have the same effect as something real, though. The pics are good but I doubt they will ever totally replace real pics.
Quote from: NotPennysBoat on 11 January, 2025, 17:14:50I'm ok with it. It doesn't have the same effect as something real, though. The pics are good but I doubt they will ever totally replace real pics.
Famous last words :) At least I hope so!
It will be an issue when this will be used to blackmail or discredit uninvolved parties. No one seems to consider the harm of this angle.
People already fall for deep fakes and refuse to acknowledge that they are indeed made up so long as it aligns with their political beliefs.
Quote from: Xedni on 10 January, 2025, 21:29:27Personally I think they're completely ethically fine, as long as it's not directly based on a specific child (like an actress or whatever). It feels like "vegan pedophilia": completely harm-free lol
There's been some really impressive strides with various secret sites and even full magazines and stuff (which I'm not clear if I'm allowed to mention by name)
What's your opinions on this stuff?
Vegetables have feelings too!
Murder is very much illegal. Watching a horror flick does not convert audience to murderers. Neither does watching vanilla porn turn people into rapists. It is the same mentality that thinks video games are the cause of violence. People who cannot distinguish fiction from reality has wider problems.
One argument against CP is that it victimizes the subjects of the recording. That argument fails apart with AI generated content.
Unlike what they tell you, AI does NOT need examples of CP to come up with generated content. For example, a mix of adult porn and content on minor anatomy would be sufficient for AI to generate content without
victimizing anyone.
You can also augment what AI generates (which may not even have genitals etc, barbiefied output) with 3D artwork to modify the output to "correct" it. You can then train on this to create completely fictional.
There are sites that state that
this person does not exist to generate fictional profiles. It is a calculated image. You can then sexualise that should you choose.
(merged double post)
I think it is very hard to formulate a convincing argument against AI CP. The main most excuse for cp prohibition is, as Shiroeneko points out, ongoing harm inflicted on the person in the image. In the case of AI generated it's a CARTOON, just an image, the same as if it were a drawing. At this point it's literally an illegal IDEA. Then we have to switch arguments and say, it encourages other crimes, which brings us to, where's the proof of that? And if that is the reason it's illegal, why did we just spend the last few decades saying cp is illegal because of ongoing harm and embarrassment to the person filmed? CP AI is innocuous. The only reason it's prohibitted is because most people find it extreamly offensive. It's like the war on drugs, if you have to lie about it to justify what you're doing, what you are doind is probably wrong.
I'm curious to see what, if any, changes the existance of hyper realistic AI CP brings about. I think you are about to enter into another golden age of cp.
AI child porn exposes the reality that what is really being persecuted here is thought crimes. The Man doesn't like the way we think about children so he'll use any excuse or pretext to come after us, even if it doesn't make any logical sense. That's why they'll bend over backwards to come up with reasons to say a drawing is child porn or fake CP is somehow 'normalizing' pedophilia or let Frank McCoy die in prison because he wrote stories they found icky. Never touched a child; never had any child porn. Just the written word. They drained his finances with endless court cases and eventually put him in prison where they exposed him to Covid to snuff him out. (Okay that last part might be a stretch, but did they have any remorse when he died in their custody? Fuck no.)
So even though I find AI CP to be firmly in the uncanny valley still, I support its creation and distribution because it exposes the facade that is the modern moral panic about child porn and pedophilia.
Much like developing issues with AI, I'm sure a fallback position regarding suppressing AI CP porn will be that "It had to be trained on real material." There would be workarounds for that, of course, but I can definitely see that argument getting traction.
I'm okay with it ethically. I just don't like its aesthetic, like how soulless it is. I could never jerk off with something I don't see as either "real" or "made with real effort"
Quote from: TooLittleTime on 13 January, 2025, 05:14:50Much like developing issues with AI, I'm sure a fallback position regarding suppressing AI CP porn will be that "It had to be trained on real material." There would be workarounds for that, of course, but I can definitely see that argument getting traction.
That can be the argument but that isn't the technology. You can ask AI to create a penis shaped apple growing from the Eiffel Tower. It did not train on that specifically. It is mixing apple, penis and the Eiffel Tower to come up with a fictitious creation.
Just as you can feed it child, penis and the Eiffel Tower to come up with a different creation. It does not require explicit training data on illegal content.
Your first output will be an abomination of a child with adult parts (since it will not have training data on a child penis in the above example) which you can refine with photoshop (or with a new prompt editing the image) etc and then retrain the algorithm to create
correct but still fictitious content. This may also be done for you in advance and a model being released by whoever did the leg work.
This isn't even a new argument. 3D art has been a thing where it is difficult to distinguish the art from the illegal content. Because this was labor intensive it was possible to regulate it (sort of). The explosion of generated content will be unmanageable. Now any idiot with a decent GPU can generate images. In a few years that will be short videos and will move on from there.
The only way to manage AI generated content will be with AI. This is possible but you will have false positives resulting in a need for human review at some point which then will be your bottle neck. Too sensitive a system, you have too many false positives. Not sensitive enough, and you miss what you want to detect. That is assuming we had consistent laws governing such content. These are resources that could be instead utilized to help actual victims of abuse of course but that does not seem to be the priority.
It is the most common implementation of the technology. Your describing a work around :) And this wouldn't likely stop a prosecutor from making the argument.
But I agree with your sentiment.
Sadly, I wouldn't want to be the one arguing in court the technical specifics of your great example vs. training with real CP. Jury's easily get lost in expert testimony. Even an argument that is technically correct, it can matter little to people on deciding guilt around something many of them have been raised to abhor.
I agree the explosion of generated content will be unmanageable. Even today the widespread creation and distribution of CP is unmanageable, but that does not mean they will stop trying.
I'm all for IA generated CP content, and it will mature.
The problem with AI porn is that the AI is trained with real pictures of probable victims so there isn't that much difference between AI images and real images. You also run into the problem of the AI creating an image with the face of a kid that looks close enough to someone real that has never been nude with a nude body of another kid.
it's debatable since no real kids were harmed but the AI will need to use images of kids that were harmed to be able to produce actually images.
I'm against AI producing AI art in general since it steals actual artists works. Loli or cartoon or 3d art of kids should just be legal anyways since it doesn't harm anyone and can be a good alternative for some of us
Quote from: shiroineko3 on 15 January, 2025, 15:27:47The only way to manage AI generated content will be with AI. This is possible but you will have false positives resulting in a need for human review at some point which then will be your bottle neck. Too sensitive a system, you have too many false positives. Not sensitive enough, and you miss what you want to detect. That is assuming we had consistent laws governing such content. These are resources that could be instead utilized to help actual victims of abuse of course but that does not seem to be the priority.
So the future is one group of AIs spitting out endless fake CP and another group of AIs endlessly combing thru the internet to flag and remove them. No humans even needed. :P
Quote from: LarrySexton on 15 January, 2025, 19:19:03The problem with AI porn is that the AI is trained with real pictures of probable victims so there isn't that much difference between AI images and real images. You also run into the problem of the AI creating an image with the face of a kid that looks close enough to someone real that has never been nude with a nude body of another kid.
it's debatable since no real kids were harmed but the AI will need to use images of kids that were harmed to be able to produce actually images.
I'm against AI producing AI art in general since it steals actual artists works. Loli or cartoon or 3d art of kids should just be legal anyways since it doesn't harm anyone and can be a good alternative for some of us
AI does not need to be trained on CP. In fact it probably never will be. It is very very computationally expensive to train on a large library of CP. The existing models probably never encountered any since CP isn't on the clearnet. No company will risk their datacenter getting raided over such a niche market. And even if somehow someone is able to rent the capability for a short while, it costs thousands and thousands of dollars/euros per hour to use such a datacenter at the level needed to process the amount of illegal content to form a viable model. The process would take a long time too not just a few hours. So the price tag would be very very high.
What CAN happen is people taking an image of a clothed individual and turning them naked. This was a thing even before AI. All you needed to do is hire an artist etc. 3D art in particular can be indistinguishable from the real thing. The AI has no knowledge what the person actually looks like under their clothes. It knows what other naked people look and "imagines" what this person should look like. While this is unethical, it does not require naked images of the person in question. This was available even in the 60s/70s where you would glue the persons face into a porn mag to imagine. Not the same thing of course.
As for artists rights... That in my view is a grey area. If I look at someone's art style and draw something strikingly similar in style but different in arrangement and content I would retain my own copyright. AI does the same thing. The generated art is not a copy of someone else's art. What AI does is it studies examples of art from zillions of examples to form a mathematical model. It is not even aware of the art itself when you expect it to "draw". It is just predicting pixels in a noise cancelling fashion ending up with something you and I would agree is AI generated art. It is really just a series of complex calculations.
The argument currently isn't about weather or not artist rights matter. The argument really is about who gets to train their models on such art. Everyone or just the largest companies such as Google, Meta and Adobe. Then the question becomes, do we want only the largest companies to have the last say on such matters.
There are desktop AI image generation systems that only require training with images you provide, and are responsible for the current increasing AI CP images floating around the dark web. I think this might explain the somewhat lower realism in these images, though I understand on a few occasions they are becoming indistinguishable from real photo's. But I am far from an expert in this space, but my understanding is this is the source of the current AI CP images being seen. Anyone who knows more can jump in :)
And small and closed system AI is quickly becoming a reality.
I'm so currious to see where this technology is going as it relates to cp. I think there will be endless new material that is indistinguishable from real. Will that trigger changes to the law? Will the public have the will to impose ridiculous sentences for fake images?
Quote from: TooLittleTime on 16 January, 2025, 17:01:12There are desktop AI image generation systems that only require training with images you provide, and are responsible for the current increasing AI CP images floating around the dark web. I think this might explain the somewhat lower realism in these images, though I understand on a few occasions they are becoming indistinguishable from real photo's. But I am far from an expert in this space, but my understanding is this is the source of the current AI CP images being seen. Anyone who knows more can jump in :)
And small and closed system AI is quickly becoming a reality.
I have not heard about that but if someone would want to go in that direction normally they'd mix a larger model with a smaller one they generated but in such cases but the "quality" will not be great. Between the two models they need to weight each one and getting a good balance is hard. Especially if the limited illegal content had inconsistent lighting, angles etc. This may be more work than it is worth it.
As far as I am aware the technique used is more about an artist drawing a sketch, using AI infill and then editing the anomalies away. Infill generation may take multiple tries. This itself can be semi-automated with AI infill iterations on the generated image itself. Alternatively infill can be used on a real photograph to
make it naked as well but this is inferior as it will have no say on the pose etc.
This sort of is/was the core problem with realistic furry models. Existing AI models lack good reference of the genitals of most animals. This isn't illegal so some wealthy furry can rent a datacenter and fork the money to train the needed model. This is assuming they can gather annotated animal genitalia. AI needs to be told what each image is about. Just feeding images without context would not particularly be helpful. That is the other bottleneck.
This is of course with a technology that is no older than two-three years. It will get more capable without explicit examples.
I find myself torn on the question.
When I consider adult porn, I see things that are troubling. For example, I remember when tits were natural and bushes were bushy. Now, porn has its consumers expecting shaved pussy and impossibly proportioned breasts. These are things nobody would have expected if they hadn't see it in porn.
Now consider AI-generated CP. Until now, the supply of CP was limited by the ability to find human participants. The worse the abuse (however you define the word), the rarer the CP, thankfully. What happens when you use AI to create an expectation that any little girl can easily accept any size cock, or whatever?
Obviously, only adult porn and CP that match my expectations should be produced. :)
Which leads nicely to the underlying problem...
Quote from: on the rocks on 13 January, 2025, 02:54:20AI child porn exposes the reality that what is really being persecuted here is thought crimes. The Man doesn't like the way we think about children so he'll use any excuse or pretext to come after us, even if it doesn't make any logical sense. That's why they'll bend over backwards to come up with reasons to say a drawing is child porn or fake CP is somehow 'normalizing' pedophilia...
Are my concerns just a way of justifying my own definition of thoughtcrime?
You bring up a great point. AI CP. Pshhhhs. I'm making an image of a 12yo boy with a hard on getting a blow job from a large goldfish. Realistically, if possible. The possibilities are literally endless.
The best will be the edge cases. Is that real? could it be real? Would that really fit like that? LOL, it is a strange world we are growing into.
Quote from: VanMcVan on 27 January, 2025, 03:13:20I find myself torn on the question.
When I consider adult porn, I see things that are troubling. For example, I remember when tits were natural and bushes were bushy. Now, porn has its consumers expecting shaved pussy and impossibly proportioned breasts. These are things nobody would have expected if they hadn't see it in porn.
Now consider AI-generated CP. Until now, the supply of CP was limited by the ability to find human participants. The worse the abuse (however you define the word), the rarer the CP, thankfully. What happens when you use AI to create an expectation that any little girl can easily accept any size cock, or whatever?
Obviously, only adult porn and CP that match my expectations should be produced. :)
Which leads nicely to the underlying problem...
Quote from: on the rocks on 13 January, 2025, 02:54:20AI child porn exposes the reality that what is really being persecuted here is thought crimes. The Man doesn't like the way we think about children so he'll use any excuse or pretext to come after us, even if it doesn't make any logical sense. That's why they'll bend over backwards to come up with reasons to say a drawing is child porn or fake CP is somehow 'normalizing' pedophilia...
Are my concerns just a way of justifying my own definition of thoughtcrime?
Porn of any kind may lead to unrealistic expectations. We do not know how many people choose a career in pizza delivery over what they see in porn for example. :D
We already have unrealistic female and male anatomy through websites like Instagram. The core problem there is people, especially young people, see the exceptions and try to "compete" with the most beautiful or most muscular person they see. Some of these people are a product of AI filters too. What they do not realize is that if some is really good at one thing (appearance in this case) they may suck at everything else.
These sites also cause dopamine addiction where you end up spending a significant amount of time on them. One way is the infinite nature of Instagram as you can scroll forever. It is as addictive as a slot machine and this isn't a coincidence. It is calculated and deliberate.
Ethically, it is better than real stuff; however, as soon as it becomes impossible to tell the difference between AI CP and real CP, it will create issues for LEA who are searching for victims of real videos. This means it is highly probable that they treat everyone the same in the long run. It would make it much more efficient for LEA. I would argue that they could eventually tack more charges onto it if it is a video like the destruction of daisy but modified by AI to like like it was AI generated rather than real. Then, we enter a slippery slope in the conversation of ethics because it makes it much harder to do these things safely.
I think in most developed places the law is clear and makes no distincion between photographs of real people and computer generated images wherein no one real was involved, and I think that machinery is already in motion. There are already people being punished for it. If anything it's something of a boon to the anti pedo law enforcement industry. An explosion of AI generated child erotica might produce a bumper crop of low hanging fruit to feed into the LEA meat grinder. But to be successful, like any persecution, the perpetrators need to keep what they are doing at least partially secret from the public. That's how a cache of pictures of topless or nude beach goers becomes, "child sexual abuse images". I think they need to sustain that lie in order to jail people for fake pictures. I don't know if most people will want to pay to incarcerate people for possessing offensive cartoons, and I wonder if governments are going to be able to hide what they are doing if more and more people are prosecuted for possession and ditribution of AI generated material. We'll see.
Quote from: LewisCarrol_Jr on 01 February, 2025, 16:23:51I don't know if most people will want to pay to incarcerate people for possessing offensive cartoons, and I wonder if governments are going to be able to hide what they are doing if more and more people are prosecuted for possession and ditribution of AI generated material. We'll see.
People thought paying to incarcerate people by the thousands for smoking pot and crack cocaine (not powder, of course) was just fine. If more and more people are prosecuted, then more and more prosecutors will look like heroes. Nobody every lost an election by being too tough on crime, especially unpopular crime.
Quote from: LewisCarrol_Jr on 01 February, 2025, 16:23:51I think in most developed places the law is clear and makes no distincion between photographs of real people and computer generated images wherein no one real was involved, and I think that machinery is already in motion. There are already people being punished for it. If anything it's something of a boon to the anti pedo law enforcement industry. An explosion of AI generated child erotica might produce a bumper crop of low hanging fruit to feed into the LEA meat grinder. But to be successful, like any persecution, the perpetrators need to keep what they are doing at least partially secret from the public. That's how a cache of pictures of topless or nude beach goers becomes, "child sexual abuse images". I think they need to sustain that lie in order to jail people for fake pictures. I don't know if most people will want to pay to incarcerate people for possessing offensive cartoons, and I wonder if governments are going to be able to hide what they are doing if more and more people are prosecuted for possession and ditribution of AI generated material. We'll see.
I've been saying much the same thing about the explicit effort to expand the definition of what is considered "child porn" by the general public in order to broaden the authority of LEAs in policing content where no actual children were involved. The proliferation of the term "Child Sexual Abuse Material/Media" or "CSAM" is the deliberate attempt to condition the general public to associate anything with child nudity, real or fake, sexual or not, with the most offensive mental image the 'normies' have in their head when they read the words "child porn".
All so in the near future when the news reports "area man arrested with 1 terabyte of CSAM," the public will be conditioned to assume it's all hardcore child pornography even if every byte of it was lolicons. Because the end game here is to police the very thoughts of as much of the population as they can when it comes to children and sex. If they can get it to work as it relates to pedophilia, then they can make it work for literally any subject.
It's the prequel to 1984, man! :pass
AI-generated pics of children and CP could be a very good thing. Once the AI gets good enough to be indistinguishable from the real thing, it will be much easier to produce the fake stuff. The fake stuff will be better quality and more easily available than the real stuff. It could potentially dry up the market for real CP, which is a good thing.
Quote from: luvyung4u on 10 February, 2025, 15:57:53AI-generated pics of children and CP could be a very good thing. Once the AI gets good enough to be indistinguishable from the real thing, it will be much easier to produce the fake stuff. The fake stuff will be better quality and more easily available than the real stuff. It could potentially dry up the market for real CP, which is a good thing.
I agree. Their will always be a market for 'the real stuff', which will often sell fakes :)
I don't know if I will live long enough, but a video AI that can post movies of an interaction you describe in the prompts, that would be the bomb. Hell, even one now that could create a good cartoon out of it would be a lot of fun to play with and write stories through. And we are there, actually... except the processing power and censorship roadblocks currently needed to create these things prevents private desktop creation. But AI is accelerating like crazy, so it may come soon.
I would love to do some of my stories as reasonably accurate moving animations.
Quote from: luvyung4u on 10 February, 2025, 15:57:53AI-generated pics of children and CP could be a very good thing. Once the AI gets good enough to be indistinguishable from the real thing, it will be much easier to produce the fake stuff. The fake stuff will be better quality and more easily available than the real stuff. It could potentially dry up the market for real CP, which is a good thing.
I remember this being part of the discussion with lolicon. It didnt. It just increased the demand for the real thing. I guess if ai become 1 to 1 photo realistic, with realistic voice models and everything sure, I could see that displacing cp. Mainly because you could develop scenes that would otherwise be absolute holy grails. I am I guess more pessimistic that an ai can replicate a human that perfectly. I feel like there is subtle quirks to how a human functions that an ai is going to have a very hard time replicating. I am also assuming this since ai cp nowadays looks so insanely fake its actually annoying when it comes up.
I also wonder if you could create basically ai "trueblood" for pedos, could it be legal? If a studio came out and could verify it would it be fine? I mean, the models they would be training these ai frameworks on would be from real cp, that would be the issue i think most would have. Plus if the early ai models "poison" the later ones when they get trained on flooded fake cp this could end the entire project.
Another thing, I know this thread is about images but AI video generation is getting better and better. All the points people in this thread have made I think go even stronger with videos. It's hard to find CP that isn't trash (though tbh I haven't looked all that hard) but being able to describe any scenario and then just watch it is mind-boggling. "Generate a video of two 12 year old virgin girls coming back to a hotel room from cheerleading practice and once they see a man on the bed they give him a super horny look and slowly start making out with each other and undressing, and slowly start to make sweet love with him as their passions are fulfilled for the first time in their lives." "No, now try again and make the girls even younger, and one asian and the other swedish." etc.
The possibilities are endless....
Quote from: SilentObserver on 11 February, 2025, 17:05:43Another thing, I know this thread is about images but AI video generation is getting better and better. All the points people in this thread have made I think go even stronger with videos. It's hard to find CP that isn't trash (though tbh I haven't looked all that hard) but being able to describe any scenario and then just watch it is mind-boggling. "Generate a video of two 12 year old virgin girls coming back to a hotel room from cheerleading practice and once they see a man on the bed they give him a super horny look and slowly start making out with each other and undressing, and slowly start to make sweet love with him as their passions are fulfilled for the first time in their lives." "No, now try again and make the girls even younger, and one asian and the other swedish." etc.
The possibilities are endless....
Which sounds hot but to me feels so fake. I think for me thats what makes cp so much more enticing is there is a childishness to it, and with that an unpredictability. We can do this type of stuff to an extent with lolicon, or erotic writings, but at the end of the day it feels and looks so fake. Much like commerical mass produced porn, its scenarios and situations that feel very unrealistic.
I guess you could develop realistic ones but i would have to see how life like it is. I know with most laws we are going to prison regardless if they are real or not so it literally doesnt matter at the end of the day. Judge isnt going to care if "no one was harmed". Youll get charged the same. I wouldnt doubt if they charged you with each "victim" counting each generated child you made as a real one, so you end up with getting charged with both producing and distrupting. News headlines say you had "hundreds of victims" when in reality it was 0.
Quote from: zergrush111 on 14 February, 2025, 14:39:48Which sounds hot but to me feels so fake. I think for me thats what makes cp so much more enticing is there is a childishness to it, and with that an unpredictability. We can do this type of stuff to an extent with lolicon, or erotic writings, but at the end of the day it feels and looks so fake. Much like commerical mass produced porn, its scenarios and situations that feel very unrealistic.
I agree completely. Of the real photos/videos I have seen, I don't like when they try to emulate adult porn, and have the girl act all fake seductively with lots of makeup, etc. I like when it feels more organic and amateur, and as you said, with unpredictability and childishness. Of course the girl has to enjoy herself and not look like she's zoning out.
Again with AI, if it doesn't look right you can tweak the prompt:
That looks so fake. Make the girls reaction genuine and childish. They are hesitant at first, this is a brand new experience for them. But once they realize the power of this new pleasurable feeling, they give in completely and acquiesce to their primal instincts. Show this in as much detail as possible.
I like the real thing
Quote from: boomer69 on 15 February, 2025, 13:50:07I like the real thing
Me too.
And I mean the "very real thing", not the "thing on a screen" ... :)
Quote from: SilentObserver on 14 February, 2025, 15:36:21Quote from: zergrush111 on 14 February, 2025, 14:39:48Which sounds hot but to me feels so fake. I think for me thats what makes cp so much more enticing is there is a childishness to it, and with that an unpredictability. We can do this type of stuff to an extent with lolicon, or erotic writings, but at the end of the day it feels and looks so fake. Much like commerical mass produced porn, its scenarios and situations that feel very unrealistic.
I agree completely. Of the real photos/videos I have seen, I don't like when they try to emulate adult porn, and have the girl act all fake seductively with lots of makeup, etc. I like when it feels more organic and amateur, and as you said, with unpredictability and childishness. Of course the girl has to enjoy herself and not look like she's zoning out.
Again with AI, if it doesn't look right you can tweak the prompt: That looks so fake. Make the girls reaction genuine and childish. They are hesitant at first, this is a brand new experience for them. But once they realize the power of this new pleasurable feeling, they give in completely and acquiesce to their primal instincts. Show this in as much detail as possible.
And if you tie a LLM with image generation (completely different algorithms). You can ask LLM to draft you the very prompt. It could be that the LLM passes this prompt to something like Stable Diffusion without showing it to you. You can have layers and layers of conversation with the LLM to generate purely fictional images and or videos for you. This already exists by the way just highly restricted/censored and running such a system locally would involve resources not available to the average Joe... At least for now.
To me its about the fantasy, so AI porn is actually a good thing, it just helps fuel my fantasy world. I don't mind if the images are fake...besides the way the tech is going, in a few more years it will be impossible to tell.
I've seen an AI CP video recently and while I knew it was fake, the video was well done enough to get me going! I think we're closer to this than we all realize. However, it will be illegal, just like the real thing... WHICH SUCKS!
In the last few months, AI videos have gotten much better. It's actually kind of dystopian, it can be hard to tell when they are real. I haven't seen any porn (cp or otherwise) generated using veo 3 but I'd imagine it to be next level..
Quote from: SilentObserver on 13 June, 2025, 14:56:23In the last few months, AI videos have gotten much better. It's actually kind of dystopian, it can be hard to tell when they are real. I haven't seen any porn (cp or otherwise) generated using veo 3 but I'd imagine it to be next level..
The porn isn't quite up to the same standard yet, since all the cutting-edge models have filters for that, but it's getting there, I've already seen on-topic material bordering on photorealistic. It's simply a matter of time now, because the genie is most certainly out of the bottle.
Quote from: SilentObserver on 13 June, 2025, 14:56:23In the last few months, AI videos have gotten much better. It's actually kind of dystopian, it can be hard to tell when they are real.
"hard to tell when they are real": that's why the police have said this is the main problem of AI pics & vids - their in-trays are getting flooded, pushing them away from the boys & girls they're trying to save.
Someone will eventually train AI to sniff out real vs. fake CP. So maybe in the near future, producers of real CP will go out of their way to make their shit look as fake as possible? :P
The on-topic imagery I've seen from AI thus far fails in one very specific, consistent way. The people are too 'perfect'. No one, not even a child, has skin so flawless and hair so regular. There are no moles or scrapes or odd blemishes anywhere. The child just removed underpants, but there's no subtle indentation left by the elastic like there is with a real child. The minute artifacts of living in the real world are absent from AI generated kiddie porn. Once you notice their absence, on topic AI is screaming obvious.
I think that's going to be a tough hurdle for AI to clear. Especially if one wants multiple images from multiple angles of the same character. The uncanny valley is a tough gap to cross.
Very true, i consistently see that. Yet, still... recently there have been AI images I could not discern from reality. What I don't know is if there is some post processing going on to make it more 'realistic'?
Only thing I am sure of, is we will get there.
The best argument I have heard so far against viewing CP is that most models after growing up would prefer people didn't distribute these pictures/videos of their childhood. Nothing LEA has done has been able to stop this, and give these people the relief they want. Flooding the space with AI CP is probably the best way to accomplish this. Especially once the fake stuff can give you what you are looking for better than the real stuff, which is going to take a while. I think this is exciting news. I really don't care whether they are seeded with real CP or not, the end result is the same. It doesn't bother me that lab grown meat requires them to seed it first with meat from real animals. It's still a fantastic thing that can do so much good for the world.
And of course it won't be legal. Just as LEA continues to attack cartoons, 3D art, and nudist documentaries, and anything close to on topic. Regardless of whether or not it is actually illegal. That doesn't stop them from getting warrants and confiscating all your equipment in their investigation, and you're not getting it back. Nothing on topic is welcome on the clearnet. Sexual stories are barely tolerated to exist on the fringes.
Sorry to bump another abandoned thread, but I feel strongly about this subject. I think AI-generated CP is an excellent thing, and I hope that it proliferates (if that's the right word) so widely that LEA will be simply overwhelmed. It'll never be legal, of course, but it might get to the "seldom enforced" level. (Just as there are localities where "Sodomy" and "adultery" are still technically illegal, but are not prosecuted, except as a pretext for prosecuting something more serious. The classic example would be the cops raiding a house where unmarried people are shacked up, in order to "find" a meth lab that they couldn't access otherwise.) I think AI-generated CP should be easily accessible and non-criminalized.
AI is already doing some interesting things with pornography. There are "chat sites" where one can create the man or woman of their dreams and "interact" with them in a way that seems very realistic. And the "models" aren't all buxom and flawless; there are fat men, skinny women, and everything in between to choose from. The only exception? They must be over 18: there are no "chat sites" where you can create a "partner" who is underage. Even using certain words, like "middle school" or "toddler," causes the chat program to reset. This is all very limited, and very vanilla, to those of us looking for CP. I only mention it as an example of how AI is already being used. Chat GPT and many imitators are virtual whorehouses now.
Those of us who use CP, or have used it, all have our favorite models, most of whom are probably grandmothers by now. But an AI-produced version of Masha or Gvenet, for example, with tiny differences and different names, would be wildly popular. And the sex would be more detailed and imaginative than anything we've seen: the "holy grail" of vaginal intercourse with a preteen, without damage, would become easily attainable. If people were willing and eager to subscribe to the old NN "child modeling" sites, why wouldn't they/we go for this kind of thing?
I realize that some people can only be satisfied by "the real thing." Okay, but the real thing isn't always pleasant for the child, and at some point, consumers of child porn need to acknowledge that — unless they're the kind of creeps who enjoy hurtcore, and don't care about the kids. Would there be AI hurtcore? Probably; some Japanese hentai is gory enough to make a vulture vomit. But, hopefully, most CP fanciers aren't into it.
I simply don't see a downside to AI-created CP, and I don't have the time or the imagination to list all the advantages.