<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>claudiawerner</author><text>&amp;gt;This area is already well explored just with fake CSAM generated by artists using photoshop, cartoons, etc.&lt;p&gt;I&amp;#x27;m familiar with the research in this area, and that&amp;#x27;s not something you can say confidently; most work (and by that I mean 2 or 3 papers in total) has gone into investigating the role &amp;#x27;generated&amp;#x27; depictions of CSAM play in the collections of hoarders. No psychological study, as far as I&amp;#x27;m aware, has conducted an investigation on those who enjoy cartoon material akin to what you might find in a Japanese manga.&lt;p&gt;In fact, there&amp;#x27;s some evidence against what you&amp;#x27;re saying; anthropological research on fans of cartoon material (&amp;#x27;lolicons&amp;#x27; or &amp;#x27;shotacons&amp;#x27;) in Japan shows that their communities draw hard lines between &amp;#x27;2D&amp;#x27; and &amp;#x27;3D&amp;#x27; not just in this area of sexuality, but in their sexualities as a whole. This sexual inclination toward the 2D world is termed the 2D-complex and is akin to &amp;#x27;digital sexuality&amp;#x27; or fictophilia, not pedophilia.&lt;p&gt;By way of analogy, perhaps BDSM would work as a good counter point to you. Many people (some studies suggest the majority of people) engage in &amp;#x27;rape fantasies&amp;#x27; or other such fantasies of illegal or immoral nature, yet although &lt;i&gt;actual&lt;/i&gt; depiction of rape is rightly banned by the state, its simulated variants are not, and we are comfortable to acknowledge that sexual desires do not always manifest in real life, and sometimes the thrill of fantasy itself is the attraction. To make it real would, ironically, defeat the whole point.</text><parent_chain><item><author>kortilla</author><text>This area is already well explored just with fake CSAM generated by artists using photoshop, cartoons, etc. The modern thinking is that it supports and encourages a behavior that can lead to actual violence.&lt;p&gt;If you constantly watch videos of people eating cheeseburgers, you might want to eat a cheeseburger yourself.</text></item><item><author>pantalaimon</author><text>Maybe I’m naive, but isn’t AI generated CSAM a good outcome, actually - because it doesn’t require actual children to be hurt?</text></item><item><author>kmeisthax</author><text>You&amp;#x27;re thinking copyright liability[0], but the real worry, straight from the mouths of the Stability people[1], is AI-generated CSAM. That will make the whole field of generative art legally radioactive.&lt;p&gt;At least with copyright law, there&amp;#x27;s an argument for training being fair use. If generative art becomes a notorious market for CSAM, everyone in the field goes to jail.&lt;p&gt;[0] Also, I&amp;#x27;d like to know what your opinion is on GitHub Copilot. A lot of people decry Copilot for stealing code but love Stable Diffusion for being public, even though they&amp;#x27;re the same concept and trained in the same quasi-ethical way.&lt;p&gt;[1] &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.reddit.com&amp;#x2F;r&amp;#x2F;StableDiffusion&amp;#x2F;comments&amp;#x2F;y9ga5s&amp;#x2F;comment&amp;#x2F;it5kkic&amp;#x2F;&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.reddit.com&amp;#x2F;r&amp;#x2F;StableDiffusion&amp;#x2F;comments&amp;#x2F;y9ga5s&amp;#x2F;com...&lt;/a&gt;</text></item><item><author>machina_ex_deus</author><text>You&amp;#x27;re missing an important vulnerability of this tech. The model was trained on copyrighted material. There are enormous pressures to close and stop this.&lt;p&gt;You can&amp;#x27;t predict future legislation. Intellectual property legislation (which is an absolute cancer IMO) can outlaw models and their results. It can outlaw distribution of the data sets, the training, the models. Tech companies already acted way beyond the requirements of the law and effectively censured open source projects like popcorn time.&lt;p&gt;Can they prevent a determined hacker which already got everything? No.&lt;p&gt;Could this be the last model to be trained on a wide dataset, available to the public? Yes.&lt;p&gt;Could they make it a living hell where getting these tools in the future will only be from untrustworthy websites where half the download buttons give you an exe, and all your less tech savvy friends won&amp;#x27;t bother? Easily.&lt;p&gt;Could this tool become impossible for companies to use without risking litigation? Very easily.&lt;p&gt;People tend to forget those making the rules do not have their interests at heart, and every single intellectual property law is designed to leave companies and not people holding all the rights. And those laws can absolutely do damage. Do not underestimate the power of legislation.</text></item><item><author>Satam</author><text>Based on a Reddit post [1], the author of this is Stability AI&amp;#x27;s chief information officer.&lt;p&gt;My very rough take on the situation: the company gained their notoriety by building on OpenAI&amp;#x27;s pioneering research but with an important twist of releasing their models as unneutered open source. Now, their openness is starting to falter due to strong pressure from outside forces.&lt;p&gt;If they&amp;#x27;re unable to continue playing the hardball game they themselves invented, I think their glory days will end as fast as they started. The competitive advantage was always their boldness. If they lose that, quickly others will take their place.&lt;p&gt;In general, I don&amp;#x27;t think tech that&amp;#x27;s as open, powerful and easily reproducible as these language models can be stopped. Sure, maybe regulations will delay it a bit, but give it a few years and any decent hacker or tinkerer will be dabbling with 5x better tech with 5x less effort.&lt;p&gt;[1] &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;archive.ph&amp;#x2F;Z5sU3&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;archive.ph&amp;#x2F;Z5sU3&lt;/a&gt;</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Why we chose not to release Stable Diffusion 1.5 as quickly</title><url>https://danieljeffries.substack.com/p/why-the-future-of-open-source-ai</url></story>
<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>djokkataja</author><text>Just like how the incredible availability of porn on the internet has led to millennials being the generation that has the most sex ever: &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&amp;#x2F;item?id=12433236&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&amp;#x2F;item?id=12433236&lt;/a&gt;</text><parent_chain><item><author>kortilla</author><text>This area is already well explored just with fake CSAM generated by artists using photoshop, cartoons, etc. The modern thinking is that it supports and encourages a behavior that can lead to actual violence.&lt;p&gt;If you constantly watch videos of people eating cheeseburgers, you might want to eat a cheeseburger yourself.</text></item><item><author>pantalaimon</author><text>Maybe I’m naive, but isn’t AI generated CSAM a good outcome, actually - because it doesn’t require actual children to be hurt?</text></item><item><author>kmeisthax</author><text>You&amp;#x27;re thinking copyright liability[0], but the real worry, straight from the mouths of the Stability people[1], is AI-generated CSAM. That will make the whole field of generative art legally radioactive.&lt;p&gt;At least with copyright law, there&amp;#x27;s an argument for training being fair use. If generative art becomes a notorious market for CSAM, everyone in the field goes to jail.&lt;p&gt;[0] Also, I&amp;#x27;d like to know what your opinion is on GitHub Copilot. A lot of people decry Copilot for stealing code but love Stable Diffusion for being public, even though they&amp;#x27;re the same concept and trained in the same quasi-ethical way.&lt;p&gt;[1] &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.reddit.com&amp;#x2F;r&amp;#x2F;StableDiffusion&amp;#x2F;comments&amp;#x2F;y9ga5s&amp;#x2F;comment&amp;#x2F;it5kkic&amp;#x2F;&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.reddit.com&amp;#x2F;r&amp;#x2F;StableDiffusion&amp;#x2F;comments&amp;#x2F;y9ga5s&amp;#x2F;com...&lt;/a&gt;</text></item><item><author>machina_ex_deus</author><text>You&amp;#x27;re missing an important vulnerability of this tech. The model was trained on copyrighted material. There are enormous pressures to close and stop this.&lt;p&gt;You can&amp;#x27;t predict future legislation. Intellectual property legislation (which is an absolute cancer IMO) can outlaw models and their results. It can outlaw distribution of the data sets, the training, the models. Tech companies already acted way beyond the requirements of the law and effectively censured open source projects like popcorn time.&lt;p&gt;Can they prevent a determined hacker which already got everything? No.&lt;p&gt;Could this be the last model to be trained on a wide dataset, available to the public? Yes.&lt;p&gt;Could they make it a living hell where getting these tools in the future will only be from untrustworthy websites where half the download buttons give you an exe, and all your less tech savvy friends won&amp;#x27;t bother? Easily.&lt;p&gt;Could this tool become impossible for companies to use without risking litigation? Very easily.&lt;p&gt;People tend to forget those making the rules do not have their interests at heart, and every single intellectual property law is designed to leave companies and not people holding all the rights. And those laws can absolutely do damage. Do not underestimate the power of legislation.</text></item><item><author>Satam</author><text>Based on a Reddit post [1], the author of this is Stability AI&amp;#x27;s chief information officer.&lt;p&gt;My very rough take on the situation: the company gained their notoriety by building on OpenAI&amp;#x27;s pioneering research but with an important twist of releasing their models as unneutered open source. Now, their openness is starting to falter due to strong pressure from outside forces.&lt;p&gt;If they&amp;#x27;re unable to continue playing the hardball game they themselves invented, I think their glory days will end as fast as they started. The competitive advantage was always their boldness. If they lose that, quickly others will take their place.&lt;p&gt;In general, I don&amp;#x27;t think tech that&amp;#x27;s as open, powerful and easily reproducible as these language models can be stopped. Sure, maybe regulations will delay it a bit, but give it a few years and any decent hacker or tinkerer will be dabbling with 5x better tech with 5x less effort.&lt;p&gt;[1] &lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;archive.ph&amp;#x2F;Z5sU3&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;archive.ph&amp;#x2F;Z5sU3&lt;/a&gt;</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Why we chose not to release Stable Diffusion 1.5 as quickly</title><url>https://danieljeffries.substack.com/p/why-the-future-of-open-source-ai</url></story>