Yeah this is a scary, clickbaity headline meant to invoke a negative response about AI. AI is a tool, like a computer or pipe wrench. It can be used for good or bad.
The sicko got what he deserved, but the AI bit is rather over-the-top.
The part that freaks me out is more that he was in an influential position in children’s lives and he was making images of the specific children who were his patients.
This is unfortunately not that uncommon. Pedos often work in child focused jobs. Very disturbing, and that’s why background checks are important in those fields.
Not only pedos, in general sadistic people tend to try and get jobs which would give them the feeling of power over someone, and not all of them can be dictators, warlords, just politicians, even lowly prison guards or policemen, also cowardice is a factor. So - child-related jobs.
But, to be frank, I’m not sure background checks are going to do that much good. People of this kind tend to bunch together, help each other, and can either get past the radar rather easy or utilize these checks to discredit anybody who’d be a threat to them.
Which makes you wonder why religious groups can get around the requirements. I am actually not against say the Church of LDS spending money to provide free therapy for children I just want those therapists held to the same standards we hold regular therapists too. Which includes sexual background screenings.
Is it honestly that surprising? Just because they are sexually attracted to kids does not mean they cannot love kids on an emotional level. I don’t think it’s impossible that there would be pedophiles who both love children and recognize that sexual and intimate contact is reprehensible.
Put differently, I would much rather hear “child psychiatrist caught with computer-generated CSAM modeled after his patients” than “child psychiatrist caught with nude photos of his patients” or “child psychiatrist charged with sexual assault of a minor”. Comparatively speaking, the first is really just computer-assisted thoughtcrime, while the others mean there was actual direct harm to a child.
Although in this particular instance, child psychiatrist is a bit too close to the child, in my opinion.
Exactly, it’s not the AI bit, it’s the rest of the story about how this dude was in a position of power to exploit children (and did so) that’s just fucking sick.
CSAM sounds like a cool weapons system, I dont want to tarnish that image nor believe that theres anyone out there who thinks “porn” implies consent, be it about kids or not
It’s because CSAM is clearer - it excludes crap like drawings. It is material from the sexual abuse of children. You cannot abuse children who do not exist.
Pretty sure the actual CP played a bigger role in the sentencing
Yeah this is a scary, clickbaity headline meant to invoke a negative response about AI. AI is a tool, like a computer or pipe wrench. It can be used for good or bad.
The sicko got what he deserved, but the AI bit is rather over-the-top.
The part that freaks me out is more that he was in an influential position in children’s lives and he was making images of the specific children who were his patients.
This is unfortunately not that uncommon. Pedos often work in child focused jobs. Very disturbing, and that’s why background checks are important in those fields.
Not only pedos, in general sadistic people tend to try and get jobs which would give them the feeling of power over someone, and not all of them can be dictators, warlords, just politicians, even lowly prison guards or policemen, also cowardice is a factor. So - child-related jobs.
But, to be frank, I’m not sure background checks are going to do that much good. People of this kind tend to bunch together, help each other, and can either get past the radar rather easy or utilize these checks to discredit anybody who’d be a threat to them.
It’s a complex matter.
Which makes you wonder why religious groups can get around the requirements. I am actually not against say the Church of LDS spending money to provide free therapy for children I just want those therapists held to the same standards we hold regular therapists too. Which includes sexual background screenings.
Is it honestly that surprising? Just because they are sexually attracted to kids does not mean they cannot love kids on an emotional level. I don’t think it’s impossible that there would be pedophiles who both love children and recognize that sexual and intimate contact is reprehensible.
Put differently, I would much rather hear “child psychiatrist caught with computer-generated CSAM modeled after his patients” than “child psychiatrist caught with nude photos of his patients” or “child psychiatrist charged with sexual assault of a minor”. Comparatively speaking, the first is really just computer-assisted thoughtcrime, while the others mean there was actual direct harm to a child.
Although in this particular instance, child psychiatrist is a bit too close to the child, in my opinion.
Exactly, it’s not the AI bit, it’s the rest of the story about how this dude was in a position of power to exploit children (and did so) that’s just fucking sick.
Username totally checks out. Definitely not AI or a bot.
CP? What does that mean?
Child pornography.
I know people should usually google things, but that’s not something that someone should really have in their search history! Lol
How come you are already using a short form, how often do you talk about this kind of thing???
Its pretty well established what CP stands for.
CP got reworded to CSAM (child sexual abuse material) btw
afaik its because „porn“ is thought to imply consent
CSAM sounds like a cool weapons system, I dont want to tarnish that image nor believe that theres anyone out there who thinks “porn” implies consent, be it about kids or not
sorry
I wasn’t debating what it meant, just that my reality is way cooler than yours mate
deleted by creator
I know, thats why I said sorry. you disnt want to believe it, I showed you proof
I think it’s more to include anything that’s sexually abusive instead of what is just pornograthic.
It’s because CSAM is clearer - it excludes crap like drawings. It is material from the sexual abuse of children. You cannot abuse children who do not exist.