To me AI and porn is a match made in heaven. Porn already seems to be based on an unrealistic version of people and sex. In a seedy industry that exploits and abuses people. So make the product with less of that? Sounds ideal. But i am not a consumer or purveyor of porn so what do i know.
To me AI and porn is a match made in heaven. Porn already seems to be based on an unrealistic version of people and sex. In a seedy industry that exploits and abuses people. So make the product with less of that? Sounds ideal. But i am not a consumer or purveyor of porn so what do i know.
"Porn already seems to be based on an unrealistic version of people and sex." Just because you've never hooked up with the repair man and/or step mom.....
Your friend the pool cleaner? Wait! What? You are friends with Giancarlo Granda?? THE Giancarlo Granda, business partner and FWB of Jerry & Becki Falwell? Awesome!
That's a very interesting ethical question. If you remove the humans from porn, how does that change the ethical questions around it? Also, if it involves no humans but is simply generated images or video, is anything off-limits?
That brings us to the most-ignored reason not to consume porn- itтАЩs bad for your existence. ItтАЩs based on the fantasy that you can have physical intimacy without emotional intimacy... without a meeting of soul and spirit or however you describe your non-physical existence. It makes you insensitive to the other person involved. It doesnтАЩt require emotional vulnerability. Physical sex is the outline of sex without content of spirit sharing. AI has no spirit. ItтАЩs a form of lying. You are damaging yourself. This is not morality. It is reality.it is emotionally empty.
Yes, but sadly there are many disgusting trolls who, while still human, don't have a snowball's chance in hell of forming a meanful physical or emotional relationship with the opposite sex. Not to mention there are already a cadre men/boys who proudly hate the opposite sex because they have issues.
From what we can tell, the major source of his entertainment when it comes to video games was playing rhythm games like Dance Dance Revolution. There are videos online of him blowing away very difficult levels, and one doesn't get that good at them without an incredible amount of practice. Do those games also cause violence?
Video games as a cause of shootings has been repeatedly debunked. There may have been a part of his personality that drew him to those games, but it would be difficult to assign causality to the games.
I have wondered this too. I'm not advocating for it, to say the least, but if no children are harmed in making pedophilia-themed video, does that change the calculation? Personally, I am grateful that I am old enough that I can probably just stick my head in the sand for the remainder of my life and pretend this isn't happening.
There's no way to know if AI porn wouldn't just serve as a gateway drug to the real thing. I don't think it would change the calculation in terms of behavior of users, just make legally safer for the producers.
On the contrary, there is a way to estimate whether AI porn will serve as gateway drug. We have an entire country as a test case. As far back as the 1970s, Japan was awash in porn. Every kind: photographic, comic book style, videos. It was and probably still is more common in Japan than the U.S. At least, I got that impression living there in the 1970s. Video porn became very common soon after the VCR was introduced. Comic books and videos began portraying more violent sex crimes in the 1980s and 90s. People predicted that actual sex crimes would increase. On the contrary, they decreased. This is well documented. As far as I know, the numbers have not been challenged. It would appear that many people who would commit sex crimes sublimate the urge by watching porn. Not all, of course.
I'm not sure I consider Japanese culture an accurate baseline data set for the US. This is a much more violent country with a culture that represses sexual expression. It would be great if the US data followed Japan's, but call me skeptical.
Japan was violent toward other countries until 1945. Internally, there was a lot of violence from 1500 to 1868. However, since 1868 it has been peaceful and orderly within Japan. The crime rate is far lower than the U.S. The homicide rate is 26 times lower per capita, 0.25 compared to the U.S. rate of 6.52. Rape and other violent crimes are much lower. The homicide rate is low partly because they have strong gun control laws. However, guns are available. Many people have them in the countryside.
They definitely do not repress sexual expression. I have read and seen Japanese pornography from the Edo period (1800) up to the present day. I know many Japanese people since I went to college there. I can report they are very open about sex. Somewhat less than they were in 1868 or 1975, but still very open. Christianity is rare in Japan, and their native religions do not prohibit sex as much as Christianity does. On the contrary, there are festivals celebrating sex, with giant phalluses paraded through the streets. Even up to the 20th century peasant customs such as teenagers sneaking into houses for sex (yobai) were widely reported. Even up to the 1970s Japan had a risqu├й reputation in the West, which I think was . . . not undeserved.
Some people in every culture have inhibitions and mixed feelings about sex.
I agree whole heartedly with your comment. I would like to clarify one remark in my own comment. By violent, in terms of the US, I also meant sexual violence/abuse. We have real problems with generational and systemic sexual violence and abuse. There's a big part of me that hopes opening porn to more men reduces that violence, but I haven't clinically seen that is true.
A fascinating, if problematic, topic to contemplate. It seems to me that our legal (and ethical) systems in this area have largely relied on damage to exploited participants. If no such people exist, then what?
We'll have to consider more strongly the "nanny state" angle on this. How bad does exposing the populace to some image/concept have to be before the nanny state can/should/would step in? Liberty absolutists will say never. No matter how awful or how well-documented the effects, the gov't should never limit "speech". What say the rest of us?
Imagine just how bad this could get. Russian IRC groups specifically designing (and A/B testing!) horrific AI content purposefully intended to increase crime and violence. Some will say it's already happening. But consider the scale in the future. Is there a point at which such "speech" is equivalent to shouting "Fire!" in a crowded theater?
I think even AI porn would promote an exploitative view of women (certainly kids! No no no) that would still have real world impact on how they are treated and seen. Still dangerous imo just a lesser evil.
Worse than what we have in the advertising that gives people eating disorders? Those creepy-as-hell kids beauty pageants that encourage girls to make themselves into sex objects? Porn might be a driver of the attitudes you're talking about, but it's going to take a hell of a lot of mainstreaming for it to hit levels that come anywhere close to what we let people swim through every single day.
I think itтАЩs all of the above but look into research on how teen girls and young women are increasingly treated by male partners in the age of internet porn. None of this is good for women or relationships in general.
To me AI and porn is a match made in heaven. Porn already seems to be based on an unrealistic version of people and sex. In a seedy industry that exploits and abuses people. So make the product with less of that? Sounds ideal. But i am not a consumer or purveyor of porn so what do i know.
I'm in total agreement with you. All the fun, none of the degradation.
"Porn already seems to be based on an unrealistic version of people and sex." Just because you've never hooked up with the repair man and/or step mom.....
I just spit coffee...
As a former pizza delivery driver, I can say with authority that it is unrealistic.
My friend the appliance repairman has suffered similar disappointment in life.
My step father was an appliance repair man, and as a teen I worked with him during summer break. Can confirm.
n.b.: a side benefit is I can repair just about any appliance worth repairing now.
My friend the pool cleaner on the other hand...
Your friend the pool cleaner? Wait! What? You are friends with Giancarlo Granda?? THE Giancarlo Granda, business partner and FWB of Jerry & Becki Falwell? Awesome!
That's a very interesting ethical question. If you remove the humans from porn, how does that change the ethical questions around it? Also, if it involves no humans but is simply generated images or video, is anything off-limits?
That brings us to the most-ignored reason not to consume porn- itтАЩs bad for your existence. ItтАЩs based on the fantasy that you can have physical intimacy without emotional intimacy... without a meeting of soul and spirit or however you describe your non-physical existence. It makes you insensitive to the other person involved. It doesnтАЩt require emotional vulnerability. Physical sex is the outline of sex without content of spirit sharing. AI has no spirit. ItтАЩs a form of lying. You are damaging yourself. This is not morality. It is reality.it is emotionally empty.
Yes, but sadly there are many disgusting trolls who, while still human, don't have a snowball's chance in hell of forming a meanful physical or emotional relationship with the opposite sex. Not to mention there are already a cadre men/boys who proudly hate the opposite sex because they have issues.
YouтАЩre right. ThatтАЩs their problem. But we do need to ensure it doesnтАЩt become our problem..
Two words: Sandy Hook. The killer had many issues, but I'll note a major source of his
entertainment was playing first-person violent games.
And there's another shooting in TX - more children killed/hurt.
From what we can tell, the major source of his entertainment when it comes to video games was playing rhythm games like Dance Dance Revolution. There are videos online of him blowing away very difficult levels, and one doesn't get that good at them without an incredible amount of practice. Do those games also cause violence?
Video games as a cause of shootings has been repeatedly debunked. There may have been a part of his personality that drew him to those games, but it would be difficult to assign causality to the games.
I have wondered this too. I'm not advocating for it, to say the least, but if no children are harmed in making pedophilia-themed video, does that change the calculation? Personally, I am grateful that I am old enough that I can probably just stick my head in the sand for the remainder of my life and pretend this isn't happening.
I feel seen.
There's no way to know if AI porn wouldn't just serve as a gateway drug to the real thing. I don't think it would change the calculation in terms of behavior of users, just make legally safer for the producers.
On the contrary, there is a way to estimate whether AI porn will serve as gateway drug. We have an entire country as a test case. As far back as the 1970s, Japan was awash in porn. Every kind: photographic, comic book style, videos. It was and probably still is more common in Japan than the U.S. At least, I got that impression living there in the 1970s. Video porn became very common soon after the VCR was introduced. Comic books and videos began portraying more violent sex crimes in the 1980s and 90s. People predicted that actual sex crimes would increase. On the contrary, they decreased. This is well documented. As far as I know, the numbers have not been challenged. It would appear that many people who would commit sex crimes sublimate the urge by watching porn. Not all, of course.
I'm not sure I consider Japanese culture an accurate baseline data set for the US. This is a much more violent country with a culture that represses sexual expression. It would be great if the US data followed Japan's, but call me skeptical.
Japan was violent toward other countries until 1945. Internally, there was a lot of violence from 1500 to 1868. However, since 1868 it has been peaceful and orderly within Japan. The crime rate is far lower than the U.S. The homicide rate is 26 times lower per capita, 0.25 compared to the U.S. rate of 6.52. Rape and other violent crimes are much lower. The homicide rate is low partly because they have strong gun control laws. However, guns are available. Many people have them in the countryside.
They definitely do not repress sexual expression. I have read and seen Japanese pornography from the Edo period (1800) up to the present day. I know many Japanese people since I went to college there. I can report they are very open about sex. Somewhat less than they were in 1868 or 1975, but still very open. Christianity is rare in Japan, and their native religions do not prohibit sex as much as Christianity does. On the contrary, there are festivals celebrating sex, with giant phalluses paraded through the streets. Even up to the 20th century peasant customs such as teenagers sneaking into houses for sex (yobai) were widely reported. Even up to the 1970s Japan had a risqu├й reputation in the West, which I think was . . . not undeserved.
Some people in every culture have inhibitions and mixed feelings about sex.
I agree whole heartedly with your comment. I would like to clarify one remark in my own comment. By violent, in terms of the US, I also meant sexual violence/abuse. We have real problems with generational and systemic sexual violence and abuse. There's a big part of me that hopes opening porn to more men reduces that violence, but I haven't clinically seen that is true.
A fascinating, if problematic, topic to contemplate. It seems to me that our legal (and ethical) systems in this area have largely relied on damage to exploited participants. If no such people exist, then what?
We'll have to consider more strongly the "nanny state" angle on this. How bad does exposing the populace to some image/concept have to be before the nanny state can/should/would step in? Liberty absolutists will say never. No matter how awful or how well-documented the effects, the gov't should never limit "speech". What say the rest of us?
Imagine just how bad this could get. Russian IRC groups specifically designing (and A/B testing!) horrific AI content purposefully intended to increase crime and violence. Some will say it's already happening. But consider the scale in the future. Is there a point at which such "speech" is equivalent to shouting "Fire!" in a crowded theater?
I think even AI porn would promote an exploitative view of women (certainly kids! No no no) that would still have real world impact on how they are treated and seen. Still dangerous imo just a lesser evil.
Worse than what we have in the advertising that gives people eating disorders? Those creepy-as-hell kids beauty pageants that encourage girls to make themselves into sex objects? Porn might be a driver of the attitudes you're talking about, but it's going to take a hell of a lot of mainstreaming for it to hit levels that come anywhere close to what we let people swim through every single day.
I think itтАЩs all of the above but look into research on how teen girls and young women are increasingly treated by male partners in the age of internet porn. None of this is good for women or relationships in general.
Exactly. It opens a whole new frontier in legal and sociological thought.
I take the opposit approach. I work in data science and AI and find it fascinating. I am optimistic that we will rise to the occasion .
"I am optimistic that we will rise to the occasion" - you did NOT just say that! :-)
I know...I know.
This conversation is getting completely out of hand.