zlacker

It's a delicate subject but not an unprecedented one. Automatic detection of already known CSAM images (as opposed to heuristic detection of unknown images) has been around for much longer than AI, and for that service to exist someone has to handle the actual CSAM before it's reduced to a perceptual hash in a database.

Maybe AI-based heuristic detection is more ethically/legally fraught since you'd have to stockpile CSAM to train on, rather than hashing then destroying your copy immediately after obtaining it.

>>jshear+(OP)
> Maybe AI detection is more ethically fraught since you'd need to keep hold of the CSAM until the next training run,

why?

the damage is already done

>>tcfhgj+z6
Why would you think that? Every distribution, every view is adding damage, even if the original victim doesn't know (or even would rather not know) about it.

>>tremon+Cc
I don't think AI training on a dataset counts as a view in this context. The concern is predators getting off on what they've done, not developing tools to stop them.

>>tremon+Cc
I don't think it's how it works.

>>jjk166+if
Debating what counts as a view is irrelevant. Some child pornography subjects feel violated by any storage or use of their images. Government officials store and use them regardless.

>>tcfhgj+z6
Some victims feel this way. Some do not.

>>tcfhgj+z6
I would think there's more possibility of it leaking or being abused in a giant stockpile. Undoubtedly, those training sets would be commercialized in some way, potentially causing some to see that as adding insult to injury.