Over on ATFbooru, there was a small argument in the comments under a realistic-looking AI-generated image. One user made this comment:
I literally thought it was real. Either way, pictures like this are generated using real kids, often CP. Expunge it please.
AI-generated images are generated completely with images in its database. So if it spits out realistic child faces and bodies that are nude or performing sexual acts, that AI used CP to be able to make that.
Another user responded with:
That’s not how that works at all. It has human skin, eye, etc., samples in its database, and it does its best to extrapolate what you want from user input. You can also sometimes input an image, but most AI platforms have HASHes of child porn images so they know to reject them. (Google what file hash is, I don’t feel like explaining it, but long story short, it’s not the image itself before you bitch about it). You can input art for it to make into a more realistic model, but that’s art, not child porn. Look up jade_chan on here for an example of something drawn that’s hot. Something like that, put through the AI generator.
Look at how badly AI mutilates images at times; the hands, the fingers, navel, thigh gap, etc., little details. It wouldn’t mess those up if it was just retooling a CP image slightly.
I can categorically prove that AI doesn’t use CP. The only exception could possibly be if it was freshly created CP (shudders) whose HASH code hasn’t been entered into the blacklist database as of yet. But in such a case, it is painfully easy and simple to see that it was indeed based on that.
And on top of this, for AI image generators that learn to make realistic stuff based on photos that had been fed into them, because there may be such things, again there’s the HASH blacklist; but on top of this, you wonder how they learn in that case? What, you think people won’t feed ADULT porn images into the bot? The bot then uses neural networking to learn what human flesh is, and how it wraps around the body. It learns what eyes are, nose, etc., all the realistic artefacts from THOSE. (Marilyn Monroe porn edits for instance, or some adult porn star, or an image from someone’s OnlyFans). Once the bot has learned about human skin, eyes, etc., it has also learned general human shapes. Again, shapes will vary, because adult male porn is likely to be entered into it too. So it can and will learn flat chests too, along with all sorts of body shapes.
In the end, the end result is at least thousands of images being fed into the bot. It spits out edits or filters or whatever while learning. And then someone enters text, requesting AI generated porn of a character that just so happens to also be a cartoon child. It then makes a realistic generated image OF THAT CHARACTER. Is it a real child? No. And if you think it would ever spit out a real child, I suggest you go to This Person Does Not Exist - Random Face Generator because NONE OF THE PEOPLE that thing generates exist, existed, or ever will exist. Look how real they look.
Now, I’m done with this subject. If anyone needs any further proof of what I’m saying, Google exists. It will back me up.
Judging by the likes vs. dislikes, the vast majority of people in that thread agree with the latter person. I myself am not an expert on AI generation. If there’s anybody here more qualified than I who can support or defy this argument, I’d appreciate it.