ram @ ram @lemmy.ca

migrated to [@ram@bookwormstory.social](ram@bookwormstory.social)

---

Read more

Posts

25

Comments

301

Joined

2 yr. ago

I never said I had evidence. I specifically said there was no evidence. The claim presented is that it's beneficial, and thte burden of proof lies with the claim.

(it’s not)

I'd love if you could cite your evidence.

I agree completely. Unfortunately techbros have been making important world-changing decisions for two decades now and our legislators seem mostly fine to let them continue unabated.

Psychologists.

There's no evidence that CSAM, real or virtual, helps reduce rates of child predation.

I can't say I entirely agree. I do think that they should be helped, but in a measured and rigorous way. None of this "let them find shit online that quells their needs". Pedophilia, in the psychological profession, is viewed in a similar light to sexual orientations; of that the person I'm responding to is correct. It's simply that they seem to be blind to nuance beyond that stance that they're stuck.

AI pedophilia is certainly a very risky move for us to simply accept, when we don't even have any data on how consumption of real or virtual CSAM impacts those who indulge in it, and to get that data would require us to do very unethical and likely illegal research as far as I can tell. The approach Kerfuffle@shi.tjust.works is suggesting is one that is naive and myopic in the most generous light; which is how I'm choosing to take it so as to not accuse them of something they may not be guilty of.

I'm also someone who's extremely progressive, and while I can sympathize with people who have these urges and no true wish to act on them, I think it's outright malicious to say that the solution is to simply allow them to exist with informal self-treatments based on online "common sense" idealism. Mental health support should absolutely be available and encouraged; part of that is making sure people are safe to disclose this stuff to medical professionals, but no part of that is just having this shit freely spread online.

I appreciate your measured and metered response. I think these are extremely tricky conversations to have, but important, especially with how technology is progressing.

How about addressing my points instead of the ad hominem attacks?

That is addressing your point. These people need to get psychological help.

If you stop “feeding” being straight, gay, whatever, does it just go away and you no longer have those sexual desires? I doubt it.

The harms brought by conversion therapy to the gay and straight people outweigh the harms that are brought about by allowing them to exist. The same is not true of pedophilia. Though it is interesting if you do see these as the same, are you for the persecution of gay or straight people as you are pedophiles, or are you in favour of pedophiles being able to enact their desires?

Much as we might hate it that some people do have those urges, it’s the reality. Pretending reality doesn’t exist usually doesn’t work out well.

It is the reality, and pretending people will just safely keep their desires to themselves has proven to not work.

I never said any such thing.

I never said you said it, but it is the result of what you're saying.

we’re also talking about images that resemble children

Since you're drawing this distinction from the words you decided were thrust in your mouth, they weren't, would you say "it's okay to beat off to children who may not exist"?

It should be very clear to anyone reading I’m not defending any kind of abuse

You're outwardly expressing pedophile apologia.

Or we could give up our rights “for the children” in a way that doesn’t actually help them at all.

What rights are you giving up?

those needs don’t just go away

Get psychological help

If people with that inclination can’t satisfy their sexual urges at home just looking at porn, it seems more likely they’re going to go out into the world and try to find some other way to do it.

Get psychological help

Also, controlling what people do at home that isn’t affecting anyone else

Feeding pedophilia is directly harmful to children who grow more at risk

I’d personally be very hesitant to ban/persecute stuff like that unless there was actual evidence that it was harmful and that the cure wasn’t going to be worse than the disease

I'd personally be very hesitant to say "it's okay to beat off to children" unless there was an actual clinical psychologist involved with the person I'm speaking to saying as such.

🤦‍♀️ I obviously mean the replaced portions of the body are AI generated, like photoshop and various other tools have been using.

Except when they are pictures of real people doing a body swap

It's available on github too https://github.com/vector-im/element-x-android/releases/tag/v0.1.6

Ya, never trust US companies. Their government's crazy to jump in and take anything they want; you may not even know they took it.

If only he'd take the 5th outside the courtroom too. His lawyers are gonna have to work awfully hard just to reduce his sentence, especially given they're working without pay.

I respectfully have to disagree. They failed to bring relevant citations and evidence to support even basic claims such as why Nintendo and PC aren't a part of the same market as PlayStation and Xbox, leaving the judge to argue that there was no reason to distinguish them without evidence to the contrary.

From what I've seen of the FTC, namely the lawsuit to stop the merger between Microsoft and Activision Blizzard, I'm doubtful of Khan's ability to form a case. That said, even a failed lawsuit against them is more than the FTC's done yet to combat a big tech company's unquestionable dominance.

If my gut feeling that this is a doomed lawsuit is right, it's hopefully the first of many so that's okay.

I wonder if his brain ended up like one of those Teslas?

I'm with you there

News aggregators (or “RSS readers”) can be built into a browser, installed on a desktop computer, or installed on a mobile device.

Opening paragraph on Wikipedia explains it pretty well

RSS (RDF Site Summary or Really Simple Syndication)[2] is a web feed[3] that allows users and applications to access updates to websites in a standardized, computer-readable format. Subscribing to RSS feeds can allow a user to keep track of many different websites in a single news aggregator, which constantly monitor sites for new content, removing the need for the user to manually check them. News aggregators (or "RSS readers") can be built into a browser, installed on a desktop computer, or installed on a mobile device.

One of these suits, filed earlier this year, invokes an arbitration clause in employees’ contracts that, according to Mashable, leaves Musk’s company on the hook for $1,600 in arbitration fees per two-party case, but only requires that former employees pay $400. With over 2,000 cases, the social media network’s arbitration bill alone comes in at nearly $4 million.

X has reportedly refused to pay those bills, either—arguing that it hasn’t required the former employees to move their disputes to arbitration. Now, ex-staffers have filed another lawsuit demanding the company pay the fees associated with their original filing.

I've not played it myself, but I've heard the final act jumps the shark pretty bad.