US man used AI to generate 13,000 child sexual abuse pictures, FBI alleges - eviltoast

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.zip/post/15863526

Steven Anderegg allegedly used the Stable Diffusion AI model to generate photos; if convicted, he could face up to 70 years in prison

    • bjorney@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      It’s open source code that someone ran on their own computer, it’s not like he used paid OpenAI credits to generate the image.

      It also would set a bad precedent - it would be like charging Solomons & Fryhle because someone used their (absolutely ubiquitous) organic chemistry textbook to create methamphetamine

    • Demigodrick@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      6 months ago

      Well the American way is not to hold the company accountable, I.e. school shootings, so yeah.

            • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              6 months ago

              Still can’t really hold them liable unless they deliberately sold a weapon to someone who legally was prohibited from having a weapon.

              Shooting are more of a mental health and social media issue in my mind. The bigger question is why did someone feel the need to kill others?

              • Demigodrick@lemmy.zip
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                6 months ago

                Still can’t really hold them liable unless they deliberately sold a weapon to someone who legally was prohibited from having a weapon.

                That’s a very American point of view though - America isn’t holding those who create/sell tools that do bad things to account. If gun manufacturers were held responsible for how the things they created were used, you can bet anything suddenly they’d be hell of lot safer. Which is the exact same point about AI.

                (Obviously not holding manufacturers/sellers to account is not an America-only issue, but this article is about AI and the USA so that’s the example I’m using.)

                The bigger question is why did someone feel the need to kill others?

                As a non-American, I think the general question is why on earth does the general public need semi-automatic weapons. Or really, any weapons.

                • ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  I mean we’re also not suing Toyota or Stolichnaya to stop drunk driving. In America the onus is on you not to do the bad thing, not on the companies or government for not preventing you from doing it. In America if you kill someone it is your fault, not Ruger’s.

                  Frankly I’m surprised it doesn’t work that way in every country, if you sell a friend your old car and he hits an old lady years or months later would you get charged? That sucks.

                • Leg@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  I see the gun issue in America in the same light as the car issue. We’re in way too fucking deep, and it’s a part of our culture now. I hate both, but I acknowledge how difficult it is to do something about it.

    • JokeDeity@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      6 months ago

      Just to be clear, you guys think that any company that produces anything that ends up used in a crime should have criminal charges for making the product? Yeah, makes about as much sense as anything these days.

    • jonne@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      6 months ago

      I think stable diffusion is an open source AI you can run on your own computer, so I don’t see how the developers should be held responsible for that.