Not a good look for Mastodon - what can be done to automate the removal of CSAM?

  • mindbleach@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    No possible definition of child sexual abuse can include drawings.

    Tell me otherwise in the same breath as insisting you’re not making that false equivalence. Apparently my patience is limitless when the lie is that fucking obvious.

    edit: Hang on, the obvious lie disguised a stupid lie. What country do you think Stanford is in? Drawing Bart Simpson’s dick is not illegal in America. You could do it right now, in MS Paint, and e-mail it to the FBI, and they’d just formally tell you to go fuck yourself. Which would obviously not be the case with ACTUAL “child sexual abuse materials,” being evidence of abusing a flesh-and-blood child.

    • balls_expert@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1466A

      (a) In General.—Any person who, in a circumstance described in subsection (d), knowingly produces, distributes, receives, or possesses with intent to distribute, a visual depiction of any kind, including a drawing, cartoon, sculpture, or painting, that— (1) (A) depicts a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct; and (B) is obscene; or (2) (A) depicts an image that is, or appears to be, of a minor engaging in graphic bestiality, sadistic or masochistic abuse, or sexual intercourse, including genital-genital, oral-genital, anal-genital, or oral-anal, whether between persons of the same or opposite sex; and (B) lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value; or attempts or conspires to do so, shall be subject to the penalties provided in section 2252A(b)(1), including the penalties provided for cases involving a prior conviction.

      • mindbleach@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        No possible definition of child sexual abuse can include drawings, no matter who writes it. That’s not what those words mean.

        Drawings… aren’t children. It is literally that simple.

        And if you think any of this is identically illegal to actual photos of child abuse - one, there’s a whole network of shamelessly public US-hosted sites for you to turn in and be a national hero, and two, you might be wholly incapable of remembering what you’re arguing. Whether you think these things are equivalent oscillates between letters.

        • balls_expert@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Step up the reading comprehension please :)

          It’s pretty funny having you state, re-state and re-re-state the exact same obvious things that everyone understands while not seeing that everyone gets that, that you’re missing the point, and that you’re yelling in a hole

          Why do you keep going?

          Are you that painfully unconvincing in real life like cmon

          Step it up