tl;dr United States government rules it may be legal to possess CSAM (Child Pornography) if it's AI generated
Dawg, last week the United States Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals made a decision which will unironically change the way CSAM (Child Pornography) is handled in the United States.
Under United States v. Anderegg, Anderegg was charged with distribution and possession of Child Pornography. Anderegg used Stable Diffusion AI to generate hyper-realistic depictions of children having sex.
While charged with CSAM, Anderegg appealed the decision and argued it was not possession of CSAM because the "children" in the images were not "real" children. Rather, Anderegg and his attorneys argued that it is not illegal to possess obscene material which does not harm anyone.
The courts official ruling: By 1969 ruling of Stanley v. Georgia, you are protected by the United States First Amendment to privately possess obscene material in one's home. Hence, because the images are completely computer generated, and no actual child was used to create the pornography, the United States government cannot constitutionally criminalize someone's private possession of those obscene images in their home under this statute
Cyber Security from Zero to Expert
A Complete Paid Course Free for 24 Hours⏰
This will help you crack your dream role
Only for the First 500 People🫣
Retweet & Reply "NEED" to get it for free.
[MUST FOLLOW] @Shipon_40AI so that I can DM you.
Want to win $20,000 worth of prizes? 😉
To celebrate something BIG coming next week, we're giving away thousands of prizes!
Want to increase your chances of winning? Just like and retweet! We'll choose five lucky users to win five tickets (each) to the prize draw. Good luck! 🏆
I appreciate everyone’s support on our security event. Not to make light of it but I’m proud of our security team for stopping the criminals at a single onboarding employee’s email account. No internal systems were compromised. No criminals paid. Transparency and defense can win
@ValaAfshar This was considered 'useless tech' when mentioned in 2011 and again in 2017.. it keeps resurfacing maybe they hope someone can find an actual use for it
You are not obligated to issue grand proclamations about incredibly complex issues you know relatively little about. You also are not obligated to flood your nervous system with upsetting imagery and information for hours -- that is not the same thing as informing yourself.