I’m surprised by some of the comments here. So much hatred for the teenagers but very little reflection on the responsibility of us as adults to create a world which is safe and understandable for young people. The real story here is not about the actions of the boys, it is about the actions of the people operating the websites they used, the big tech companies who created the tools and the governments (which we adults vote for) failing to properly regulate any of this. Generative AI is a disaster for young people and it was adults who created and unleashed it on them.
We (adults) created a world with knives, guns, automobiles. But if any of these were used by a child for manslaughter would you still blame collective adults? No, parents are held responsible for protecting their children and controlling their access to dangerous tools.
Yeah. Society is responsible for the outcomes of its children. It shouldn’t personally hurt your feelings but it should motivate your actions.
Bad argument. None of those things are easily accessible by, or even targeted at, teenagers. Generative AI is a technology that big tech is specifically building into the social media platforms and devices that young people use every day and there is no regulation or education to protect against the dangers it poses.
Knives and car keys are accessible. I don’t know about porn AI tools, i haven’t seen any myself. The AI tools i did see have guard rails that make improper use impossible.
I’m an adult and am not responsible for anything you described. They were all there even before I was born. In fact, the same may apply to my parents or even grandparents. I’d rather blame a sociopolitical class than any single generation for all those ills.
But to answer your question, yes, I’d blame that entire class for the harm caused by young people using murder tools they introduced. They did it with the full knowledge of its consequences. They valued momentary material gains above the wellbeing of entire generations. They absolutely should be punished for all the mass shootings in schools, because they knew it could happen. Yet they chose the blood money. Similarly, if an entire city is under a drugs epidemic (like the current opioid crisis), wouldn’t you want to hunt down the producers and suppliers, instead of the users?
I mean I would and do in fact literally blame societal and familial problems when kids are brutal, unkind, or hurt others, and similarly blame societal and familial problems for when kids are not protected from brutal, unkind, and hurtful things.
Why are you saying the things you’re saying like a gotcha? Do you not feel that society has a significant impact on the behavior of youth?
Would the impact have been any different if they had used photoshop?
Since when could someone do this in Photoshop with a couple of clicks and zero training, for free and on any device? Since when has Adobe specifically marketed Photoshop as a tool for creating sexually explicit images?
Since when could someone do this … with a couple of clicks and zero training, for free and on any device?
You know, somebody probably said the exact same thing about Photoshop when it first came out? Back when cutting up photos and pasting them together was a thing. Then again, somebody probably said the same thing about the advent of photography too, during the days of woodcuts and oil paintings.
Since when has Adobe specifically marketed Photoshop as a tool for creating sexually explicit images?
Fuck knows. It’s not like I made any such claim, you just decided to put up a strawman argument.
How is it a “strawman” when it relates specifically to the topic being discussed? A simple web search can bring up countless examples of generative AI tools that are designed to “undress” or “nudify” women. You seem to believe there is zero difference between using one of these sites and using Photoshop, so I am asking when Adobe marketed Photoshop as an undressing tool. The ease of use and access is the key difference here that you are trying to avoid acknowledging.
My question was very simple and limited in scope:
Would the impact have been any different if they had used photoshop?
I did not make any sweeping comments, and I would appreciate if you stopped trying to claim things on my behalf.
I haven’t seen a single comment like you described
A bunch of comments were removed/deleted.
I don’t understand why using AI is what makes this illegal. I don’t know the laws in Spain, but would it be illegal if they used a pencil or a paint brush? Seems like a weird line to draw if not.
The minors were charged with 20 counts of creating child sex abuse images and 20 counts of offenses against their victims’ moral integrity.
The article doesn’t make the claim that the AI is what makes it illegal, simply that AI was used. It’s literally the second sentence. Indeed, it goes on to highlight that there are legal novelties prosecuting the use of AI.
As far as I understand; it’s not the tools used that makes this illegal, but the realism/accuracy of the final product regardless of how it was produced.
If you were to have a high proficiency with manual Photoshop and produced similar quality fakes, you’d be committing the same crime(s)
creating child sex abuse images
and
offenses against their victims’ moral integrity
The thing is, AI tools are becoming more and more accessible to teens. Time, effort, and skill are no longer roadblocks to creating these images; which leaves very very little in an irresponsible teenagers way…
Which still seems kinda dumb. How realistic is too realistic? You could make a legal standard of “photography-like”, or something, just to define who to convict, but you still haven’t really justified why.
The sentence in this case is just classes, though, so I’ll leave my pitchfork in the shed.
Did… Did you just ask; why creating photo-realistic sexually explicit material of real children, should be illegal?
Keep in mind these were other kids their age. We’re not talking about pedo stuff here.
All the recent stuff about deepfakes feels a bit moral-panic-y to me. I think we should have a better reason than just ick before anyone gets thrown in jail.
We’re not talking about pedo stuff here.
Do you want an explanation of why creating and sharing sexually explicit material of other people without consent is problematic and damaging, and especially for children?
This is a really good idea. Perhaps this is what should be happening in the first place rather than resorting to direct legal enforcement, which can be problematic and damaging, especially for children.
If you cant understand that sharing naked photos of people is bad, then you probably should have to face the court systems.
Like what? I don’t care how horny you are as a teenager, it takes a real fucking idiot, and a huge shitstain to go and share those photos. They absolutely deserve the book being thrown at them.
Yes.
I can see why we’d prohibit it, but somehow doing it in writing without involving the subject is pretty accepted (see: every fanfiction involving characters played by a specific real actor), and mentally doing it is like an informal human right.
I’m honestly not trying to be obtuse here. It seems arbitrary to me. People have pictured me in all kinds of horrifying situations, I’m sure (probably more violent then sexy, but still). I’m not bothered, nor would I be if they made a collection of depictions (unless they sent some to me).
They shared sexually explicit images in whatsapp groups. You consider that similar to having personal thoughts nobody will know of or written stories?
“were completely terrified and had tremendous anxiety attacks because they were suffering this in silence.”
Have you dismissed this quote? I don’t know where to start explaining how it’s different from what you described because of how far off it is. I have no idea where the baseline is to argue from.
Humans are a social creature. We form groups, and want to be part of groups. Teens are especially vulnerable with a developing personality, social norms, and social belonging. Breaking norms and violating common personal barriers and control of self-expression and self-presentation is deeply violating in a vulnerable phase of life.
They didn’t create a personal collection. They shared in their social groups.
Not the company making the CSAM machine though.
In addition to probation, the teens will also be required to attend classes on gender and equality, as well as on the “responsible use of information and communication technologies,”
…
What?
Have you not interacted with teenage boys?
I can think of not much more of a better way to teach them there are no consequences and they can keep doing this as long as they smirk and say they’re sorry whenever they get caught
The minors were charged with 20 counts of creating child sex abuse images and 20 counts of offenses against their victims’ moral integrity
Punishment or not, those charges are still scary. I think the probation and courses are a good addition.
I don’t think those are additions, I think those are the punishments for those charges, in full. I could be wrong but that’s how I read it.
Teens sentenced in Spain were between the ages of 13 and 15. According to the Guardian, Spanish law prevented sentencing of minors under 14, but the youth court “can force them to take part in rehabilitation courses.”
Some of them are too young to receive real sentencing. It’s important to remember that they’re children, too.
Yeah, it’s probably more important to make sure we don’t have child porn generation machines available to anyone online.
Since anyone can download and train their own AI, that ship has probably sailed.
I think training your own image generator on existing child porn is probably beyond most high schoolers. I’d be happy if at least commercial options were held responsible for distributing generated CP, which is already illegal BTW.
I don’t think the models are trained on CP. They’re likely trained on widely-available porn.
Good luck with that
I mean you can do a significant amount by making it illegal to offer it on the open web, which might be the way to go, but creating awesome things that can be had once you go outside the law actually carries its own little long-term consequences
I disagree, these children are minors and the their behavior, while abhorrent, belies a fundamental lack of perspective and empathy.
I’ve been a teenage boy before and I did some bone-headed things. Maybe not this bad, but still, I agree with the judge in this instance that it would be inappropriate to impose permanent consequences on these kids before their life even gets started because they were stupid, horny, teenage boys.
Even if we assume that these kids don’t all have well-meaning parents who who will impose their own punishments, having a probation officer in high school is not going to help with popularity. Then, mandatory classes that will force these boys to evaluate the situation from another perspective seems like a great add-on.
I know it doesn’t feel like justice, but our goal as a society shouldn’t be to dole out maximum punishment in every instance. The goal is to allow all of us to peacefully coexist and contribute to society - throwing children in a dark hole somewhere to be forgotten isn’t going to help with that.
Having said all of the above, it feels like a good time to emphasize that we still don’t have any good ideas for solving the core problem here, which is the malicious use of this technology that was dumped on society without any regard for the types of problems that it would create, and entirely without a plan to add guard rails. While I’m far from the only one considering this problem, it should be clear enough by now that dragging our feet on creating regulation isn’t getting us any closer to a solution.
At a minimum it feels like we need to implement a mandatory class on the responsible use of technology, but the obvious question there is how to keep the material relevant. Maybe it’s something that tech companies could be mandated to provide to all users under 18 - a brief, recurring training (could be a video, idc) and assessment that minors would have to complete quarterly to demonstrate that they understand their responsibilities.
I’ve been a teenage boy before and I did some bone-headed things. Maybe not this bad, but still, I agree with the judge in this instance that it would be inappropriate to impose permanent consequences on these kids before their life even gets started because they were stupid, horny, teenage boys.
Completely agree with 100% of this
I’m just saying that I think the answer lies somewhere between “take some classes and promise not to do it again” and “adult prison”. They imposed significant harm to another human being, in a way that’s so significant that we all agreed it should be illegal. Yes, I know that probably wasn’t the intent on their part. But this kind of “oh but I just got horny and just kind of didn’t care / wasn’t focused on what the impact was” is not a thing you wanna teach them there’s some wiggle room with as long as they make sure to apologize about it after.
Community service? Home arrest? Juvenile detention for 21 days? Fuckin something? I’m not saying put them in the hole.
I’ve been a teenage boy before and I did some bone-headed things
Same.
I would be surprised if anyone with the same history didnt do at least a few completely boneheaded things at one point in their youth.
when reached for comment, the makers of the ai tool stated that they were shocked that the tool was used for the purpose for which it was built
/s because it’s not a real quote but also:
/sI am so lucky I wasn’t in school when AI was around.
People used to say that about social media
Can’t say I’m surprised
It is a moral imperative that creating non-consentual pornography of someone be illegal. You should absolutely suffer legal consequences for making porn of someone without their consent, regardless of whether that person is a minor or not.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
When you’re a horny teenager you don’t think of that as CP. You think those are your classmates of your own age and you want to see them naked.
The AI tool is the problem here.
Whenever I read “too much time on their hands” I find it a stupid argument. Dismissive, misdirected, and completely besides the point.
How do you evaluate your own time reading and commenting on Lemmy? Is writing your comment time well spent?
I’m so old the only AI tools we had were drilling holes into the girl’s locker room shower walls.
🤖 I’m a bot that provides automatic summaries for articles:
Click here to see the summary
In addition to probation, the teens will also be required to attend classes on gender and equality, as well as on the “responsible use of information and communication technologies,” a press release from the Juvenile Court of Badajoz said.
In addition to mental health impacts, victims have reported losing trust in classmates who targeted them and wanting to switch schools to avoid further contact with harassers.
Minors targeting classmates may not realize exactly how far images can potentially spread when generating fake child sex abuse materials (CSAM); they could even end up on the dark web.
An investigation by the United Kingdom-based Internet Watch Foundation (IWF) last year reported that “20,254 AI-generated images were found to have been posted to one dark web CSAM forum in a one-month period,” with more than half determined most likely to be criminal.
While lawmakers struggle to apply existing protections against CSAM to AI-generated images or to update laws to explicitly prosecute the offense, other more drastic solutions to prevent the harmful spread of deepfakes have been proposed.
Ars could not immediately reach Meta for comment on efforts to combat the proliferation of AI-generated CSAM on WhatsApp, the private messaging app that was used to share fake images in Spain.
Saved 72% of original text.
