• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

Metaverse Madness Megathread

It is horrible. Feel bad for all the fools that loaded their photos into silly apps in recent years.
There's a website called Pimeyes that uses facial recognition software to find and pictures of any face that's been uploaded onto any site other than social media sites like Facebook and it's scary accurate. I used it to help a lady friend find a naughty video her ex uploaded onto a porn site 5 years ago. Also and old pictures you may have uploaded onto any site that's still active can easily be found.
 
Upvote 0
I don't think there's been any cases yet with AI images representing under age high school girls. So there hasn't been a chance for this defense to be used yet. It's an uncanny topic to even contemplate.
Yeah. I kicked it around with a couple people yesterday and all I succeeded in doing was making people uncomfortable, lol. I did look at Ohio's child porn statute which contemplates imagery showing a "minor or impaired person." While there's still the issue of there not being a real life victim, I wonder if a prosecutor may be able to utilize this caveat:

In a prosecution under this section, the trier of fact may infer that a person in the material or performance involved is a minor or impaired person if the material or performance, through its title, text, visual representation, or otherwise, represents or depicts the person as a minor or impaired person.

R.C. 2907.322(B)(3).

If a jury infers that an image of an underage or impaired person is a minor owing to the "visual representation" or whatnot I think a conviction could result despite there being no human victim. On the other hand, the images aren't created out of thin air... which is to say, couldn't the argument be made that the AI created image has uncounted victims?
 
Yeah. I kicked it around with a couple people yesterday and all I succeeded in doing was making people uncomfortable, lol. I did look at Ohio's child porn statute which contemplates imagery showing a "minor or impaired person." While there's still the issue of there not being a real life victim, I wonder if a prosecutor may be able to utilize this caveat:



R.C. 2907.322(B)(3).

If a jury infers that an image of an underage or impaired person is a minor owing to the "visual representation" or whatnot I think a conviction could result despite there being no human victim. On the other hand, the images aren't created out of thin air... which is to say, couldn't the argument be made that the AI created image has uncounted victims?
That’s what I was thinking about these cases, seems like the prosecutors need to prove that the ai image was based on the images of an underage girl.

However here’s a possible grey area imo. It’s one thing to take the face of a person, but if the aspects of the naked body is not of coming from that person, would it still count as underage nudity?

As creepy as it is, I don’t think it’s considered illegal CP just to have a folder full of high school year book photos, so I wonder if they need to determine there being underage body parts represented in the nude to make a case. For instance if someone took some girls face and put it on 90s Pamela Anderson’s body? The body would be of a voluptuous grown woman, but the face of a girl. What would a jury likely conclude there?
 
Upvote 0
AI is not the greatest invention since sliced bread.
Neither is the internet itself. For those of you old enough, remember when we thought the web would be mankind's greatest achievement? Instantly sharing the world's knowledge around the globe? The possibilities were endless. Now I envision Tim Berners-Lee sitting in a dirty old recliner, sporting a 3 day growth of beard and a torn t shirt, an ashtray full of butts next to him and a bottle of cheap whiskey in his hand while muttering over and over to himself "What the fuck did I do"?
 
Neither is the internet itself. For those of you old enough, remember when we thought the web would be mankind's greatest achievement? Instantly sharing the world's knowledge around the globe? The possibilities were endless. Now I envision Tim Berners-Lee sitting in a dirty old recliner, sporting a 3 day growth of beard and a torn t shirt, an ashtray full of butts next to him and a bottle of cheap whiskey in his hand while muttering over and over to himself "What the fuck did I do"?
Al gore is a fucking dickhead
 

metaverse-player-730-jpeg.webp

1. How is there even sex, let alone rape?
2. Just take the headset off and walk away.
 
Is it legally considered CP if it’s an AI image of an underage girl?

It’s really disturbing to think that could be a loophole but I am not clear on those laws so not sure how that would work.

I suspect it is, or maybe a slightly lesser crime.
I'm absolutely certain we've already addressed loopholes like "adults pretending to be underage children".
Then again Hollywood routinely depicts 16yr olds having sex with 22yr old actors so... maybe im wrong.
 
Upvote 0
Back
Top