- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
You must log in or register to comment.
Not at all surprising but also it is an AI
Wait… so you meant to tell me that predatory simps are using AI incorrectly? Man…. If only someone could have called this years ago- something could have been done to minimize it!
Who knew that unchecked growth could lead to negative results?!
But they did, AI Dungeon got nerfed so bad you could only have happy adventures with.
I don’t know what that is.
It was an AI text adventure game based on GPT 2 (nowadays it uses a more advanced custom LLM) . It released a long time ago and lots of people repurposed it as an interactive erotica novel
😂I tried it as well, and literally every story ended in something erotic somehow 🤣
IIRC it was a sort of AI Dungeon Master for games like DnD
It wasn’t really like DND, it was like those old text based adventure games you would be able to play on DOS PCs before they got advanced enough for proper 2d graphics. Except this one was AI generated using GPT2 to have infinite interactive scenarios
It still exists if you want to check it out yourself, but it no longer uses GPT2
A bit off topic… But from my understanding, the US currently doesn’t have a single federal agency that is responsible for AI regulation… However, there is an agency for child abuse protection: the National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect within Department of HHS
If AI girlfriends generating CSAM is how we get AI regulation in the US, I’d be equally surprised and appalled
This isn’t surprising, it’s inevitable.
If you folks knew how common pedophilic fantasies are amongst the general public, you would be shocked. Just look to cultures like Japan and Russia that don’t strongly condemn such things, and you’ll find it’s about 15% of the population. It’s only less in the West because of the near homicidal stigma attached to it that makes people vigorously hide that part of themselves.
Fortunately, this also shows that the vast majority of those people don’t offend.
We also tend to define pedophilia as “anything sexual involving a minor”, while reacting to it as if it means “violent rape of a toddler”, so no shit, we sexualize youth all the time, the 18 year mark is a legal and social formality, not a hard limit on human attraction. Adults will find themselves attracted to teens, and they won’t reveal that because who the fuck ever would?
If anything, the issue isn’t that people have these attractions and fantasies, it is that some portion of those people can’t separate fantasy from reality and are willing to hurt a child to get what they want, or they are sociopaths that consume child porn without feeling disgust for witnessing horrific child abuse.
to cultures like Japan and Russia that don’t strongly condemn such things
As someone from Russia - what?
Unless you mean being attracted to post-puberty, but pre-legal girls. That, ahem, makes sense biologically.
Girls of that age are sometimes kinda cruel to boys, though, so my personal teenage years trauma prevents me from dreaming of them. But if not for it, I think I would.
Toddlers are a completely different issue.
There is this thing that I feel is most prevalent in the USA, to call any attraction to a girl under the age of 18 pedophilia. Because that’s the age to star in porn. The term should truly be used for attraction to children. I think it’s an extension of the “pedo panic” where every man is assumed for some reason to be a child rapist now.
As such almost every young man could at some point be caught as a “pedophile”- 17 year olds sneak into clubs all the time, for example. 20 year old hooked up with one? Now he is considered a pedophile even if the actual age of consent is lower.
Meanwhile the porn industry glorifies “barely 18” girls as something highly desirable. It’s a little messed up to say the least.
Actual pedos who are into kids should be put in mental institutions. But I would strongly suspect that 15% stated just includes honest young men and creepy old men, none of which are truly pedophiles. That number is way too high.
As such almost every young man could at some point
Something is wrong with your stats. “Almost every” would be above 97%. Or if by “could” you mean it happening in a perfectly normal situation - yes.
OK, I don’t really like talking about that age and that subject. Just batch-commenting everything.
I think the common incest fantasy in the west isn’t too far removed from this too. Like all the actors are above age minimums but they pretend to be step kids or babysitters like these roles aren’t commonly associated with children and older teens. It’s clearly a form of deflection IMO.
As the other comment implies, that’s just the easiest plot to shove porn into. I don’t think that many people are watching it for the plot, it just happens to be there. Like, people aren’t fantasizing about becoming a plumber to fuck women instead of being paid, for example. It’s just a lazy plot because they need to give some reason for the scene.
I think there’s something to be said for how commonly these fantasies and plots feature specifically young or youthful stereotypes. I think there’s no denying that people are into that sort of thing.
For sure some people are into it. I know from my experience I don’t care for that plot. I still watch them because that’s 90% of porn now it seems, but I don’t pretend like it’s a teenager and a parent involved.
I don’t mean just the “stepsister” stuff but overall the fascination with schoolgirls, babysitters and all that stuff.
Could also be that those are the only porns with even a half assed attempt at a plot instead of just opening with a ground and pound
even a half assed attempt at a plot
“I watch it for the plot, I wonder if they’ll ever get her unstuck”
It probably stuck from the time when porn was becoming a bit more normal to watch, so it still had some nominal plot initially. Still gender roles with women being at home busy with washing machines and all such, or babysitting.
I actually don’t think this is shocking or something that needs to be “investigated.” Other than the sketchy website that doesn’t secure user’s data, that is.
Actual child abuse / grooming happens on social media, chat services, and local churches. Not in a one on one between a user and a llm.
It’s the “burn that witch” reaction.
See how they hate pedophiles and not child rapists.
The crowd wants to feel its power by condemning (and lynching if possible) someone.
I’d rather want to investigate those calling for “investigation” and further violation of privacy of people who for all we know have committed no crime.
That’s about freedom of speech and yelling “fire” in a crowded theater and thousand hills radio, you know the argument.
pedophiles are bad, if you think otherwise you’re pedophile enabling scum and are just as guilty as they are.
edit: I’ll wear the down votes like a badge of honor if it means pedophiles that train their grooming habits against AI are branded as pedophiles.
See, imo this is the exact kind of thinking that makes pedophilia dangerous. Most people would agree that being attracted to children is a mental illness. Most people would agree that mental illnesses should be treated by a knowledgeable professional. But pedophilia is so stigmatized that someone even admitting they have a problem, one I very much doubt most of them want to have, has people calling for them to be drawn and quartered, regardless of if they’ve ever actually hurt anyone.
Do I like that there’s art and writing of people having fantasies about children? No, of course not. But making it impossible for people to have a safe outlet, to even talk about it with a medical professional for fear of imprisonment, death threats, or worse, makes it so these people can’t even get the help they need. It’s like teaching abstinence only sex ed. You’re trying to get people to stop having fantasies by burying them, but it only exacerbates the issue.
Edit: lol got your downvote less than five minutes in and the whole comment edited to just say “pedophiles bad.” I guess I, as you like to put it, “hit a nerve.”
deleted by creator
Lmao are you out here saying we should essentially smear people for thought crimes?
deleted by creator
would this also apply to if you are pretending to shoot people online?
deleted by creator
If I get to know all that stuff about my neighbors, my neighbors get to know tons of information about me too.
Hard pass. Wake me when someone commits a crime.
Americans frighten me
Me too
There are literally tv shows about how to get away with murder. Very popular ones. Those viewers don’t murder at a higher rate than others.
There’s literally a drama that was on ABC called, you guessed it, “How to Get Away With Murder”
As a fiction writer, I do research on espionage, sabotage and even methods of assassination all the time. But I’m not going to make a salted bomb and nuke Jerusalem even though that is an entirely viable evil plot that may even create a net negative death toll.
True poisoners, as Agatha Christie notes, use thallium, not arsenic nor cyanide (though ricin is good if you can get it.) Thallium assassins are also self-regulating, like demolitions experts, killing off those insufficiently careful when handling the stuff.
Modern police are lazy until enough of a stink is made to find a culprit for a specific incident, which is why modern assassins targeting VIPs will find a self-radicalized desperado and point them toward the target. This is the sort of thing FBI is looking for in the investigations of Crooks and Routh. They are likely just blue suicides (or green suicides in this case) but finding a operative pointing them towards Trump would indicate an actual plot. But even if those tracks are found, it would unlikely lead to a specific identity.
I know about this not just to write fiction, but also to understand how things happen, how our fall into one party autocracy and societal collapse plays out. And yes, it means I do a lot of web searches that might excite an onlooking behavioral research agent. Sadly, they’d find I’m yet another boring false positive, though if the nation does succumb to autocracy, I’d certainly write for the resistance. FBI may not care so much about that.
We often look up creepy things just so see if we can, and we do that a lot more than because we’re eager to build a bomb or fast-track our inheritance.
deleted by creator
instead of knowing someone in the neighborhood is researching how to get away with murder.
…how would I know that?
insert surprised pikachu face here
This is a weird one, because while fantasy is fantasy, and doesn’t necessarily indicate an intention to act on anything, these people were dumb enough to share these specific fantasies with some random AI porn site. That’s got to be an indicator of poor impulse control, right?
That alone should probably warrant immediate FBI background checks, or whatever relevant agencies have jurisdiction for these types of criminal investigations in each user’s locality.
Of course, I am saying it’s without actually having read any of the chats. So it’s possible my opinion would change from “this should be investigated”, to summary executions and burn the bodies for good measure… but no way I’m reading those fucking chats.
Just to be clear, are you saying that people should be investigated by the police for fictional stories that they read?
*ask to be written
Tomato, to-illegal.
No, I am saying that sharing fantasies about underage children with a shady and poorly designed AI porn site, shows a serious lack of judgement and impulse control.
For that reason, yeah, they probably deserve having a quick review of their life to make sure that’s the only poor choice they’ve made in regards to that particular fantasy.
And they weren’t just reading, they were prompting the LLM model to generate these specific fantasies. They didn’t just come across a fucked up website and read a few forum posts.
If we investigated everyone with poor impulse control, we’d be investigating 80% of the world.
80% of the world shares their pedophile fantasies with shoddy AI LLM porn sites…?
bro we got literal pedophiles roaming the streets… catholic church, other “churches”, hollywood and youtube “influencers” all have known pedophiles WHO NOT BEING PROSECUTED FOR THE CRIMES THEY ALREADY COMMITTED
But you want state resources wasted what is essentially a thought crime or because “they might be pedophiles”?
🤡
Idiots can’t even properly ID the threat… no wonder country is going down the drain.
“no sex crimes should be investigated until the Catholic Church and Hollywood have been purged of pedophiles”
Well, that’s certainly an opinion.
do you have evidence of a sex crime?
if so, please report to your local prosecutor and police.
I heard even a US president is one… and still walks free.
Yes, clinton and trump both flew on Esptain plane… nothing was done.
Ruling class and their regime whores seem to get away with whatever but we got normies wanting FEDS to investigate chat logs of incels to “save the kids, just in case”
I’m just saying, police investigation of fiction creators and readers for the content of their fiction is way over the line of a lot of social and political norms.
(Also, I think you’ll find that police abuse children a lot more than pervy fiction fans do; so really, who should be investigating whom? Investigation into crime is supposed to start with evidence that a crime actually occurred — not with your personal disgust towards someone’s reading matter.)
You’re really going to great lengths to ignore what I’ve been saying, and instead responding to whatever strawman you find most convenient.
Now you’ve moved onto, “why should police investigate pedophiles, when they are the real pedophiles. In fact, the pedophile fantasy users of the site should be investigating the police”.
I mean, do you even hear yourself?
I hate torture-porn movies like the Saw series, but a lot of people are fans of them. Should I worry that those people are likely to commit kidnapping, torture, and murder? Should I advocate that the makers or watchers of those movies be investigated for kidnapping, torture, and murder — without any evidence that a crime was committed?
We don’t send the cops after people for liking murder stories, theft stories, industrial sabotage stories, or treason stories. We shouldn’t send the cops after people for liking stories of Harry Potter getting fucked by Severus Snape either.
I think you should be more careful to distinguish fantasy from reality. Most fiction readers and writers have no problem doing so.
Strawman, strawman, strawman.
Even when I reiterate that we’re not talking about passive consumption of media, but active participation in something else entirely, you can’t help but ignore that, and continue lobbing out fallacy after fallacy.
Maybe you should reread my original comments, and see why your comments have been so pointless, bordering on disingenuous.
So you’re into sending the police after the writers, directors, and producers of the Saw movies, but not the audiences?
I dunno man, that’s still too fascist for my tastes, but you can keep fantasizing about it. I promise I won’t try to send the police after you for your perverted fantasies of state power.
You don’t understand what you are talking about. Legally or otherwise.
Is that an indicator of poor impulse control? Really? Finding some shady back of the internet ai site to put some weird fantasy prompts into to get themselves off? Seems pretty calculated to me. They can’t put it somewhere legitimate where content is moderated and policed. Seems like pretty sound logic to me.
Dont get me wrong, these people are sick. If thats what they are into then theres something wrong, but instead of targeting real kids like so many people actually do, you know, like hollywood, celebrities, musicians, the catholic church etc they are entering prompts and reading stories. Sounds like impulse controlled to me.
Paywall. That site frankly does not even look legit and looking at the plethora of other AI sites I don’t know who would use this one. It’s not even displaying correctly and has like 0 information on anything. If I were to stumble upon that site I’d think it is shady as hell.
It is a independent publication for tech critical journalism, founded by ex motherboard journalists. Only some of their stuff is paywalled, some only requires free account. Agree on their site but their journalism is usually pretty good.
You are almost definitely getting downvoted because it sounds like you’re saying 404media is not legit. I realize that you’re not, but I’ll admit I interpreted it incorrectly at first.
Is 404 an AI site?
No but having misinterpreted your message once myself and then seeing the replies, I was just letting you know.
I think when people read “this site” in the comments, they assume it refers to the link itself. So while the rest of your comment makes it clear, you try to connect it to the (incorrect) assumption. Like 404media isn’t a very pretty site so I can see why someone might insult the aesthetics?
I don’t know, I wasn’t picking a fight or anything
There are better ways to assess the legitimacy of a media outlet than critiquing its web design. The Wikipedia page might be a good start.
I don’t like the loginwall, but it doesn’t require payment.
They aren’t talking about the news site. They are talking about the AI site.
You might want to work on your reading comprehension.
I also think the issue was with your comment. It could’ve been written a bit more clearly
I don’t know how my comment is unclear. Unless 404 is an AI site somehow, which I wouldn’t even know about.
The site looks fine to me, I’m not sure where your criticism is coming from.
Oh, I thought you were talking about the linked news article website. My mistake, I wasn’t about to check out the site that allegedly lets you make CP
I specifically called it an AI site. I really don’t know how people can confuse that.
The manga girl?
deleted by creator
Literally not paywalled.
And they did this for free posts because there’s lots of sites that scrap and re"publish" articles.
I know this isn’t necessarily helpful, but 404media has an account wall, not a paywall. You authenticate by email without a password.
They aren’t talking about the 404media site.
Ah, pardon my misunderstanding. I thought the two paragraphs weren’t related.
