Current Events > Five CA 8th graders expelled after using AI to generate nudes of classmates

(+) Yeah! (+)

Alucard188 posted...

They should really be charged for dissemination of child pornography. Doesn't matter if it's fake or not. This shit is not okay.

It isn't CP according to the article. The AI bodies were generated then they superimposed faces on them. Basically something people have been doing since the 90s minus the AI part.

Don't they know that AI is to be used to make generic big boobed anime girls with 3 arms with eight fingers and to be lazy in writing an essay?

Alucard188 posted...

They should really be charged for dissemination of child pornography. Doesn't matter if it's fake or not. This shit is not okay.

Yup and it's gross that have users here pretty much giving the "boys will be boys" excuse.

mybbqrules posted...

Boy who would have thought that jumping right into the deep end of the AI pool while giving a firm middle finger to touchy subjects like "regulation" would possibly turn out this way?

Anything except hold males accountable

Funkydog posted...

shows a genuine evil and disregard for women.

Or they're pubescent early teens that slapped images of girls they know over erotica to use a fodder as they explore masturbation as a new aspect of their bodies.

People need to get over what is quite frankly sexism when it comes to calling things 'violating others' or asking for criminal records simply because they view men as reprehensible for discovering sexuality.

This is why we should be teaching kids to respect women. It's not woke, it's good parenting.

lock them up and throw away the key for life

The laws are going to be slow on this so I think there needs to be zero tolerance for this at schools. Schools already have the tendency to coddle the bullies and punish victims, if the laws arent going to protect our victims (mostly women) from this kind of stuff enough yet, then I do agree with expulsion. May be "harsh" but idk? It feels like if we coddle the perpetrators too much with a slap on the wrist then it'll only serve their benefit and not the fellow classmates they're basically making revenge porn of.

CE has a really warped sense of where the maturity level of children is

Maybe its all just the folks who dont actually have kids, who dont remember what children are like?

what they did was terrible no doubt but at age 12-13 you shouldnt be ruining a childs life for fucking up

DuneMan posted...

Or they're pubescent early teens that slapped images of girls they know over erotica to use a fodder as they explore masturbation as a new aspect of their bodies.

People need to get over what is quite frankly sexism when it comes to calling things 'violating others' or asking for criminal records simply because they view men as reprehensible for discovering sexuality.

Nuance? On CE?

That's a paddlin'.

Honestly though this is why I said it's a teaching moment. You can still punish them but takes like

AlephZero posted...

lock them up and throw away the key for life

This serve absolutely nothing but to ruin the lives of 5 individuals.

You're throwing away their lives to mete out some sense of justice. You're turning what can be a teachable, but still punishable, moment for them and making them into permanent burdens on society. Instead of taking the time and effort to rehabilitate them into productive members of society, the moment they fuck up (pretty bad) you want to throw them away and force society to pay to keep them alive.

DuneMan posted...

Or they're pubescent early teens that slapped images of girls they know over erotica to use a fodder as they explore masturbation as a new aspect of their bodies.

People need to get over what is quite frankly sexism when it comes to calling things 'violating others' or asking for criminal records simply because they view men as reprehensible for discovering sexuality.

This reeks of the usual 'he is a promising student/athlete" when a rich white kid fucks up to me.

I'm not saying they need their lives ruined but the priority is removing them from their victims permanently and said victims safety. Not worrying about if the perpetrators can be given a nice, teachable moment to grow from.

Fair, next.

You literally said you were calling for them to have a criminal record, as children... They've already been expelled. So shouldn't you accept that when you then say that that you aren't calling for their lives to be ruined?

Remember, these aren't adults, or even kids old enough for high school.

DuneMan posted...

You literally said you were calling for them to have a criminal record, as children... They've already been expelled. So shouldn't you accept that when you then say that that you aren't calling for their lives to be ruined?

Remember, these aren't adults, or even kids old enough for high school.

I mean... don't make child porn if you dont want a criminal record?

Funkydog posted...

This reeks of the usual 'he is a promising student/athlete" when a rich white kid fucks up to me.

I'm not saying they need their lives ruined but the priority is removing them from their victims permanently and said victims safety. Not worrying about if the perpetrators can be given a nice, teachable moment to grow from.

Which they have been, though maybe not permanently currently.

You can have it all ways, remove them from their victims, punish them (appropriately), teach them and all while not throwing their lives into the garbage and making them permanent detriments to society.

While their actions are what you would expect out of a degenerate adult, they are still kids.

Funkydog posted...

I mean... don't make child porn if you dont want a criminal record?

This is fine and dandy to apply to adults or even older teens.

These kids almost guaranteedly did not have the foresight to even think that what they're doing constituted developing CP. Same way as when kids take nudes of themselves, they're not thinking that they're (technically) generating CP of themselves or of their friends.

We're expecting these kids to understand the severity of their actions when they've likely barely, if at all, received any level of sex ed or online safety classes regarding abusive material.

And if you wanted to teach an (in-depth) class about the dangers and hazards of this kind of content to kids their age, you'd have a bunch of (conservative) parents beating down your door threatening your life because "how fucking dare you tell my little Jimmy about porn"

This whole situation is tragic, all around.

some users are doing the old, "boys will be boys" bullshit to defend this shit

Mr_Karate_II posted...

some users are doing the old, "boys will be boys" bullshit to defend this shit

Where?

13 year olds having felony sex offender status for the rest of their lives for putting their classmates faces on cgi bodies might not be the best idea

Is not the same thing, especially when they go in depth giving explanations and you do fuck all.

Revelation34 posted...

It isn't CP according to the article. The AI bodies were generated then they superimposed faces on them. Basically something people have been doing since the 90s minus the AI part.

As said, the laws are currently in their infancy so it might not be legally CP yet, but there are already cases that are charging on it and once the outcome comes out for those cases there's going to be precedence.
DuneMan posted...

Or they're pubescent early teens that slapped images of girls they know over erotica to use a fodder as they explore masturbation as a new aspect of their bodies.

People need to get over what is quite frankly sexism when it comes to calling things 'violating others' or asking for criminal records simply because they view men as reprehensible for discovering sexuality.

The difference here is that they shared this with others. I think that's something some of you are missing. This kind of thing can cause people to kill themselves and middle schoolers who bully classmates into committing suicide will generally get lasting consequences for it, or least ideally they would. And this would definitely be "violating others" if an adult did this. The main problem here is just the age of the culprits.

wackyteen posted...

This is fine and dandy to apply to adults or even older teens.

These kids almost guaranteedly did not have the foresight to even think that what they're doing constituted developing CP. Same way as when kids take nudes of themselves, they're not thinking that they're (technically) generating CP of themselves or of their friends.

We're expecting these kids to understand the severity of their actions when they've likely barely, if at all, received any level of sex ed or online safety classes regarding abusive material.

And if you wanted to teach an (in-depth) class about the dangers and hazards of this kind of content to kids their age, you'd have a bunch of (conservative) parents beating down your door threatening your life because "how fucking dare you tell my little Jimmy about porn"

This whole situation is tragic, all around.

The difference is that kids taking nudes of themselves are generally only using it for private use for themselves and their partners.

If the kid is instead taking their classmate's nudes and selling them online...

I agree that the standards to expel and charge kids and "ruin their lives" should be higher due them still growing and developing. But generating and distributing AI generated porn of classmates absolutely meets and exceeds those standards. Even at that age, there is no way that they should have thought that there was nothing wrong with that. Fuck those kids. they deserved it.

Mr_Karate_II posted...

some users are doing the old, "boys will be boys" bullshit to defend this shit

* kids will be kids

Wherethisfeom posted...

If kids distributing child porn is normal where you live that's very concerning. I suppose that is the same place where school shootings are *kids will be kids* though.

article says they basically cut and pasted pictures of their classmates onto the bodies of porn stars, Im certain kids have been doing that for decades, and calling it child pornography especially when it was made by children is absurd

everyone involved in this story is a child, well, except the parents and suggesting they should be locked up for this or branded sex offenders is ridiculous

expulsion is fair. people advocating for charging 13 year olds criminally are the reason the school to prison pipeline is such a major issue. you don't introduce young kids to the justice system unless they are committing violent crimes

Wherethisfeom posted...

So you're saying it should be legal for people to create AI porn using children as models? Interesting, I thought you were one of those that was against lolicon and child sex robots, both of which have much less potential for CSA and much less likely to harm actual children too.

im not saying that, no

I'm fairly certain that kids would get in big trouble if they were distributing porn with their classmates heads pasted on them around too.

the kids did get in big trouble, as they should

they shouldnt be sent to prison and they shouldnt be charged as sex offenders, like many in this topic were advocating

the perspective of the parents and the district presented in the article is correct

"Furthermore, we recognize that kids are still learning and growing, and mistakes are part of this process," the district said in a statement. "However, accountability is essential, and appropriate measures have been taken."

Wherethisfeom posted...

So you're saying it should be legal for people to create AI porn using children as models? Interesting, I thought you were one of those that was against lolicon and child sex robots, both of which have much less potential for CSA and much less likely to harm actual children too.
I'm fairly certain that kids would get in big trouble if they were distributing porn with their classmates heads pasted on them around too.

it's almost like children aren't subject to the same punishment as adults and criminally charging kids basically ensures they are fucked forever.

TheGoldenEel posted...

article says they basically cut and pasted pictures of their classmates onto the bodies of porn stars, Im certain kids have been doing that for decades, and calling it child pornography especially when it was made by children is absurd

everyone involved in this story is a child, well, except the parents and suggesting they should be locked up for this or branded sex offenders is ridiculous

The difference is that they were sharing it with others, again a type of bullying and harassment that can cause victims to commit suicide. Bullies not facing consequences is one of the biggest issues in schools right now and often leads to suicide, currently at an all time high for youths, or school shootings. You're acting like this is just kids being dumb about doing something private. If a kid was selling nudes of their classmates online you think that doesn't constitute as child porn?

Even if we ignore the rest of the shit show this topic has turned into, thats basically saying the kids 20 years ago photoshopping classmates heads onto pornstars and sharing their best creations with their friends on AIM should have gone to prison, with a serious permanent mark against them for the rest of their lives.

I dont know if thats the appropriate response, and I dont really know how you stop stuff like that either. Weve found graffiti that amounts to basically the same shit thats thousands of years old.

I dont think immediate life altering consequences at such a young age is the best way.

Thats been shown to not even be effective on adults as far as basic crime punishment statistics goes.

Alteres posted...

Even if we ignore the rest of the shit show this topic has turned into, thats basically saying the kids 20 years ago photoshopping classmates heads onto pornstars and sharing their best creations with their friends on AIM should have gone to prison, with a serious permanent mark against them for the rest of their lives.

I dont know if thats the appropriate response, and I dont really know how you stop stuff like that either. Weve found graffiti that amounts to basically the same shit thats thousands of years old.

I dont think immediate life altering consequences at such a young age is the best way.

Thats been shown to not even be effective on adults as far as basic crime punishment statistics goes.

Think it should be common sense that times change with technology. This is like saying how everybody on the internet used to be able to tell each other to kill themselves without repercussion and thus it shouldn't be illegal now when linked to someone. There's also the fact that pedophilia and child porn itself wasn't taken nearly as seriously back then. This was before Chris Hansen and even for a bit after Chris Hansen pedobear was treated more as a joke than something serious. Child porn itself wasn't made fully illegal until the 1980s.

The point was, that behavior is something that has been observed for millennia and if you want to correct it now, throwing the harshest punishments possible at brand new teenagers when that doesnt work for adults probably isnt the best way.

Do people just purposely miss your point so they can find something to attack?

That's a terrible point. Rape and murder have also been observed for millennia. Your graffiti comparison could even be used to justify all child porn? Yes, they shouldn't be charged as adults, which would be prison time, but there should be tough consequences for it.

If you are in 8th grade pulling this shit, expulsion should be the least concerning thing on your mind.

Dear lord.

being expelled is the right call, but it does show that we will need updated laws most likely. It may not fully reach the definition of CP (not completely sure), but its still a problem that needs to be nipped quickly, but without ruining the kids lives, as they are still young and should still have a chance at normal life during this age of puberty.

. Also lets look at it from the girls view. They just had fake nudes of their bodies released, it dont matter they are fake, it still terrifying.

as for the argument it is no different than taping a face picture onto a magazine. It is, as that mostly stays private, where as this goes public fast being digital in nature.

Funkydog posted...

I mean... don't make child porn if you dont want a criminal record?

They didn't though. Read the article again.

Soliloquy_Rhap posted...

As said, the laws are currently in their infancy so it might not be legally CP yet, but there are already cases that are charging on it and once the outcome comes out for those cases there's going to be precedence.

The difference here is that they shared this with others. I think that's something some of you are missing. This kind of thing can cause people to kill themselves and middle schoolers who bully classmates into committing suicide will generally get lasting consequences for it, or least ideally they would. And this would definitely be "violating others" if an adult did this. The main problem here is just the age of the culprits.

The difference is that kids taking nudes of themselves are generally only using it for private use for themselves and their partners.

If the kid is instead taking their classmate's nudes and selling them online...

I wasn't just talking about legally. Read the article more closely.

Revelation34 posted...

I wasn't just talking about legally. Read the article more closely.

CP is a legal term.

metralo posted...

I feel so bad for girls growing up in this shithole country.

Lol

Rotterdammerung posted...

Anything except hold males accountable

If you're inferring that I don't think they should be punished, you're wrong.

However, I do think its worth pointing out that AI regulation is something that needs to be addressed.

We're going to have convincing AI videos in a few years of people saying things they never said, I'd rather not wait until then to decide what the rules are.

Soliloquy_Rhap posted...

CP is a legal term.

Ok and?

Revelation34 posted...

Ok and?

So you have no point. Your point about how people used to cut and paste kids heads onto magazine porn star bodies (which is probably illegal anyway given that kids legally aren't supposed to be exposed to porn either) is stupid since ease of technology changes all that. Just because you can let your friend borrow a new game or movie decades in the past doesn't mean that creating mass distributing pirate sites can't get you criminally charged.

Soliloquy_Rhap posted...

So you have no point. Your point about how people used to cut and paste kids heads onto magazine porn star bodies (which is probably illegal anyway given that kids legally aren't supposed to be exposed to porn either) is stupid since ease of technology changes all that. Just because you can let your friend borrow a new game or movie decades in the past doesn't mean that creating mass distributing pirate sites can't get you criminally charged.

No the point was it isn't CP under any definition because it wasn't their bodies that were generated.

Revelation34 posted...

No the point was it isn't CP under any definition because it wasn't their bodies that were generated.

According to the U.S. Department of Justice, the legal definition of child pornography is any visual depiction of sexually explicit conduct involving a minor. This can include depictions across a number of different media, including: Photographs. Videos. Digital images or videos.

Child pornography (also called CP, child sexual abuse material,[1] CSAM,[2] child porn, or kiddie porn) is erotic material that depicts persons under the age of 18. The precise characteristics of what constitutes child pornography varies by criminal jurisdiction.[3][4]
Child pornography is often produced through online solicitation, coercion and covert photographing. In some cases, sexual abuse (such as forcible rape) is involved during production. Pornographic pictures of minors are also often produced by children and teenagers themselves without the involvement of an adult. Images and videos are collected and shared by online sex offenders.
Laws regarding child pornography generally include sexual images involving prepubescents, pubescent, or post-pubescent minors and computer-generated images that appear to involve them.

Doesnt say it has to be actual childrens bodies, simply that it involves minors and this does.

Theres a reason even in the countries that dont consider cartoon drawings child porn, a lot of them do consider photorealistic computer generations child porn.

Again, theres a case right now thats charging a teacher doing this exact thing for child porn.

There has been too much shot with this already. The tech needs to be limited in stopping people from generating nudes period. They have access to all existing ones and should at least attempt to put a cap on this stuff because it will only get worse.

Soliloquy_Rhap posted...

Theres a reason even in the countries that dont consider cartoon drawings child porn, a lot of them do consider photorealistic computer generations child porn.

Iirc basically if law enforcement has to spend time figuring out if a photo is real or not then it's illegal. An obvious cartoon is an obvious cartoon. They just don't want fictitious stuff to cause wasted time catching real perpetrators.

X8Azazel8X posted...

There has been too much shot with this already. The tech needs to be limited in stopping people from generating nudes period. They have access to all existing ones and should at least attempt to put a cap on this stuff because it will only get worse.

You're playing a never-ending game of whack-a-mole if you try to stop generative AI programs from (being able to) generate nudes.

By even attempting to do so, you are creating demand for products that can do specifically that.

The best you can do is punish those that engage in the intentional production and distribution of nudes/porn that features underage(-presenting) individuals or, in this case, editing the faces/photos of real children/teens onto the bodies of life-like AI generated nude/pornographic photos.

Existing generative, widely/publicly available AI that want to make a (profitable) business out of it are trying to catch all the terms, descriptors, etc that can be used to generate (explicit) underage photos, but they're essentially fighting a clientele determined to test every possible combination to get what they want.

wackyteen posted...

You're playing a never-ending game of whack-a-mole if you try to stop generative AI programs from (being able to) generate nudes.

By even attempting to do so, you are creating demand for products that can do specifically that.

The best you can do is punish those that engage in the intentional production and distribution of nudes/porn that features underage(-presenting) individuals or, in this case, editing the faces/photos of real children/teens onto the bodies of life-like AI generated nude/pornographic photos.

Existing generative, widely/publicly available AI that want to make a (profitable) business out of it are trying to catch all the terms, descriptors, etc that can be used to generate (explicit) underage photos, but they're essentially fighting a clientele determined to test every possible combination to get what they want.

Thats a problem for the engineers then, isnt it?

if you cant design a generative ai model that is prevented from generating child porn, maybe that generative ai model shouldnt be released

TheGoldenEel posted...

Thats a problem for the engineers then, isnt it?

if you cant design a generative ai model that is prevented from generating child porn, maybe that generative ai model shouldnt be released

It's a problem they're working on.

And if you ban it, legally, outright then you just create demand in the black market where actual nefarious individuals will create products to meet said demand.

It's just an area where I think going after the distributors will be better overall, at least now in the short to mid term.