If there were a real issue, Patreon would send a real reply
They did send a real reply. Just because you can’t and/or refuse to understand it doesn’t mean someone messed up. I get that you’re butthurt that your favorite place to upload shitty memes is in trouble, but it’s their own fault and I refuse to feel sorry for them.
What exactly are you confused about? The definition of continually? To be complaint with CSAM laws you have to actually make changes to your platform to ensure the same situation doesn’t happen again. Catbox doesn’t do that. They will eventually be prosecuted.
And my impression is Patreon said such handling was sufficient in 2021.
And it was. Because when pressed to make changes to ensure that it was more difficult to share CSAM, they refused. They were shutdown and then finally made the changes allowing them to operate again. In the same way that Catbox isn’t doing anything to actually stop CSAM from being shared on their platform. Compliance with the law after you’re caught with this type of content isn’t enough. They will eventually all be arrested for “facilitating” CSAM just like any of those dark web forums are.
This is not only incorrect (this particular law doesn’t apply here), but I can easily prove it beyond any shadow of a doubt.
Backpage was shutdown despite their willingness to comply with the law because they were found to “facilitate” CSAM. Omegle was also temporarily shutdown for the same reasons. There have also been quite literally dozens of prosecutions of website admins on the dark web for offering a platform for CSAM despite them arguing in court that they had no control over what their users uploaded and quickly moderated the content when discovered. In the end none of it matters–as a provider of a service you are required to make it difficult to share CSAM, not just comply with the law when someone catches you with your pants down.
It bedevils me that people are so laissez-faire about literal fucking CP–AI generated or not.
And in spite of literally all of that, none of this has anything to do with US law. It’s Patron policy. They don’t want to service someone who constantly has issues with CSAM, and they have every right not to offer their services to catbox.
Ultimately, yes, I think they are.
There’s no opinion to be had. You are absolutely morally and legally responsible for what your users upload. Period.
Seems like you’re completely missing my point. I’m not implying that catbox doesn’t remove this content, or cooperate with authorities. I’m saying that Patreon chooses to not offer their services to projects which continually have this issue in the first place…
The photos perfectly elaborate, though… They didn’t really get screwed, someone uploaded “animated child sexual abuse photos.” Which is not only illegal but against the TOS of Patreon. From the photos shared it looks like this isn’t the first time it’s happened, either, and Patreon clearly doesn’t want anything to do with it–which frankly is their right.
Not really sure how this equates to them “being screwed.” They’re responsible for what people upload to their service (they clearly understand that) which is why public uploads like this without restriction aren’t a great idea.
All the more reason to setup Adguard Home/Unbound.
I mean, twitter sucked when it first launched, too. Doesn’t mean it won’t get better.
Not sure why everyone is so hellbent on FOSS software to be in its most usable and polished state on launch but will buy prereleased and/or beta games and put in 10,000 hours into half finished games without batting an eye. The double standard for FOSS developers is insane to me.
I don’t understand the obsession in integrating everything with OID services, like Google. People already complain all the time about Google watch-dogging them and then integrate every single service imaginable with their Google account. Shit is just weird to me.
They’re an open platform. Anyone can buy ad time on their platforms. It has nothing to do with Google and everything to do with people buying ad time.
If you’re going to be pissed, then be pissed. Just be right.
Because a lot of the reason that child sexual abuse is so horrific and wrong has to do with their developmental age and understanding of what’s happening and ability to give consent.
And not once in any of my replies do I denounce this, refute it, or even disagree with it. You an I both agree that violence, including sexual violence, against children or the developmentally disabled is repugnant to a degree that I don’t even possess the powers of speech to adequately express. But that’s not what’s being discussed here. What is being discussed here is whether or not thought crimes should be illegal–which is what this is. It’s a thought crime.
I don’t agree with people using AI to create porn of those with developmental disabilities. I’m not advocating for it or defending it. But in our system of law there has to be a victim of a crime for an action to be called a crime. Since there is no victim–as AI “influencers” aren’t protected by law as they’re not real–you can’t charge these people with crimes. That’s an objective truth, and its important that things stay that way because it won’t be long that we’re prosecuting XXX for XXX because of XXX, because XXX is President and XXX doesn’t like XXX behavior.
True, but someone with a developmental disability in which they mentally remain very much a child for their whole life is clearly a different thing.
Thinking and behaving like a child because of a developmental disability is the not same as being a child. Even if a person has the mentality of a child they’re still an adult. They have adult rights, and adult responsibilities. The mentally infirm deserve more protections under the law (and they get them) than the average person, but you can’t charge people who crime against those who have developmental disabilities as if they crimed against children. That’s pure and unadulterated insanity and denies reality.
You seem to be stuck in the idea that those who think like children should be protected like children. And I don’t necessarily disagree with that at face value. But it’s more nuanced than you’re giving it credit for and not something you can do in our legal system because even criminals have rights, and deserve to be charged with crimes appropriate to their crime–as fucked up as that sounds, its how our legal system works. Attempting rape is not the same crime as rape. Even if said criminal had every intention to actually rape, if they didn’t actually rape then you can’t charge them with rape.
In the same fashion, you can’t charge a person who sexually assaults a person with a disability with child based sex crime simply because the person who was assaulted has the mind of a child. That’s not appropriate and infringes the rights of the criminal. We already have separate laws which address the disparity in the mentally ill’s inability to protect themselves within our laws–and these laws are very important. A sex crime against a woman, and a developmentally challenged woman are already two different crimes, the latter of which can be significantly worse because of the victims inability to protect themselves.
The extreme right are happily using free speech as a shield to do that literally right now and we are literally in a constitutional crisis because of it.
They’re trying. Yes. But we still have the constitution. They can try all they want, that doesn’t mean they’ll be successful. They’ve been trying for decades and decades to make being gay illegal, and they haven’t gotten anywhere with it. None of this is new. The issue would be giving them precedence to go off of. If they have that, they can make the case that you actually can make being gay illegal–and you’re going to want to avoid that at all costs.
In the US and Australia, it actually is illegal to create art of children in sexual situations.
I very specifically took the time to include “grown adults doing grown adult things.” Why you chose to overlook that, and post anyways as if I didn’t explicitly exclude anything involving children is beyond my understanding.
Freedom is such a vague word, we shouldn’t use this word if we want to be precise about what we mean by it.
I cannot more strongly disagree as it’s very explicitly defined. Libre software is not the same as open source software even though the non-initiated equate the two.
However, I do not think we should use the term open source.
This is why most people use the term FOSS now; free and open source software. Then of course there’s Libre.
While I do wholeheartedly agree that promoting fetishization of marginalized people who are vulnerable is despicable, evil, and just about any other pejorative you can think of–but it’s a thought crime.
It’s not illegal to create digital art (even the disgusting kind) which depicts fictitious grown adults doing grown adult things.
I would argue that if any such subclass of degenerate could exist, then they already do exist. You’re not creating this subclass and any claim of expansion of such a subclass would be anecdotal at best and bullshit at worst. If they’re out there they’re out there. It’s a chicken and egg problem. Which came first, the pornography or the degenerate?
We have a constitutionally protected right in this country to freedom of expression and that right cannot be infringed simply because you believe that it could lead to more people being taken advantage of. The right to that expression must be protected regardless of how repugnant you believe the resultant actions are. As history is shown any number of times the restriction of any right is a slippery slope in any capacity. There’s a quote by Noam Chomsky which is particularly relevant here;
If you believe in freedom of speech, you believe in freedom of speech for views you don’t like. Goebbels was in favor of freedom of speech for views he liked. So was Stalin. If you’re in favor of freedom of speech, that means you’re in favor of freedom of speech precisely for views you despise.
As a society we need to strongly condemn these actions, and we need to ensure that the most vulnerable among us are absolutely protected. But as soon as you start making thought crimes illegal you open the door to any number of machinations. How long before the extreme right use that precedent to start prosecuting individuals for other thought crimes? I would bet my last dollar it wouldn’t take very long…
I don’t disagree but the idea being that the law is made by supposedly moral men and that law is at least moral within the perspective and context of society at the time.
Then die. I don’t know what else to tell you.
If your business model is predicated on breaking the law then you don’t deserve to exist.
You can’t send people to prison for 5 years and charge them $100,000 for downloading a movie and then turn around and let big business do it for free because they need to “train their AI model” and call one of thief but not the other…
So they do this for all apps. Every single app that is in the Android ecosystem. But in your mind they’re specifically targeting firefox with this to make people “scared” huh?
Must be nice to live in denial.
Literally any uploader that requires an account to upload. Any one. Any provider that requires registration will be infinitely more compliant and well suited to deal with these issues than one that doesn’t.