No idea what "vibes" are. My question was a very clear one -- definition. If one draws someone in a bikini (the current Twitter craze), it fails the Roth test for unprotected obscene speech on point 2 ("Judged by what the average person in a particular community finds acceptable") -- nobody online today finds bikini photos unacceptable. It is thus constitutionally-protected free speech. If one prompts an ML model to do the drawing, how is it different?
If your English is weak, there are dictionaries, translation programs, and LLMs that can help. The first meaning at https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/vibe is “a distinctive feeling or quality capable of being sensed,” which is the relevant one here.
The OP article refers to “outputs that sexualized real people without consent.” If any of those real people are minors, that qualifies as CSAM. It’s not complicated.
Given that “put X into a bikini” is constitutionally protected speech, and the output fails the Roth test for obscenity and is thus the same, would not every other law be null and void w.r.t. stoping this? And “qualifies as X according to some unelected org with no lawmaking power” is even weaker than a law.
You dislike it. I get it. I do too. But this is a discussion of law. Legally, I do not see how any law was broken. I welcome any citation to the contrary. I note, again, that "some unelected org said so" is not a weighty argument when the opposition is the SCOTUS's clear stance on the 1st amendment.
