So why are you posting all over this thread about how CSAM was included in the training set if that is in your opinion ultimately irrelevant with regards to the topic of the post and discussion, the morality of using AI to generate CSAM?
I know. So to confirm, you’re saying that you’re okay with AI generated CSAM as long as the training data for the model didn’t include any CSAM?
Chat is this real
Sounds to me it would be more like outlawing grand pianos because of all of the dead elephants - while some people are claiming that it is possible to make a grand piano without killing elephants.
Furthermore, it’s not that the original scientists failed to produce true-color images. The original published images of Neptune had deliberately enhanced colors to better show some of the features of the cloud surface, and the description text of the images said as much. But that nuance was quickly forgotten and everybody just took the deep blue coloring to reflect the actual color of the planet, which spread to depictions of the planet everywhere.
I mean.
One might be a coincidence.
Two out of two? Considering how few high profile whistleblowers there are, that is much more unlikely to be due to random chance, statistically speaking.
Similar to how it’s not impossible that someone might fall out of a window and die.
But if in a certain country, important people who have crossed the leadership keep falling out of windows, … well.
I’m not sure why they want to make Russian people believe that Putin and his SMO are causing this misery to them but ok
I want it that way
I see no problem as long as the fire department didn’t order them to touch it.
There are roughly speaking two kinds of systems. The kind of system where Bachelor is the default degree you get from university, and you can go on to get a Masters and/or a doctorate. And the other kind of system where the default university degree is a combined Bachelor and Masters, and you can study further to get a doctorate. The latter kind is in use in a lot of continental Europe, at least.
Sure then, if you want to call it that. But did it work? Were countries not invaded by the US thanks to Swedish appeasement?
What I’m saying is, if China and Russia truly cared about what the US is doing, they could choose to sanction the US and the West just like the West is doing to Russia right now. Like you say, China throwing their weight in would certainly have an influence.
Sure they would, but not as much as Russia doing the same but much closer to Sweden.
Maybe they should stop being such goody-two-shoes then if they want to have an influence in the world.
Wars “breaking out” like it isn’t Russia invading everybody else lmao
Now you lost me, surely Hitler was being appeased by the Allies allowing him to do things they would’ve preferred him not to do?
Ah yes, Russia and China, so well known for following international law to the letter.
It’s not appeasement if the party being “appeased” is not opposed to you to begin with.
Because the US geopolitical goals and actions, while often reprehensible, generally speaking aren’t against Swedish interests, whereas Russia is a much more direct threat to Sweden.
Why does China keep appeasing the US by not sending weapons to support Russia?
So at best we don’t know whether or not AI CSAM without CSAM training data is possible. “This AI used CSAM training data” is not an answer to that question. It is even less of an answer to the question “Should AI generated CSAM be illegal?” Just like “elephants get killed for their ivory” is not an answer to “should pianos be illegal?”
If your argument is that yes, all AI CSAM should be illegal whether or not the training used real CSAM, then argue that point. Whether or not any specific AI used CSAM to train is an irrelevant non sequitur. A lot of what you’re doing now is replying to “pencils should not be illegal just because some people write bad stuff” with the equivalent of “this one guy did some bad stuff before writing it down”. That is completely unrelated to the argument being made.