News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Some notes on the Stable Diffusion safety filter by properparity on Friday November 18, 2022 @02:16PM (#33660462)
We need to let it completely loose and get everyone exposed to it everywhere so that maybe we can finally get rid of this insane taboo and uptightness about sex and nudity we have in society.
Re:Some notes on the Stable Diffusion safety filter by octagons on Friday November 18, 2022 @02:33PM (#33660741)
Nudity? Yes. Pornography? No.
Re:Some notes on the Stable Diffusion safety filter by archontes on Friday November 18, 2022 @02:37PM (#33660828)
No rules.
Re:Some notes on the Stable Diffusion safety filter by rcoveson on Friday November 18, 2022 @02:50PM (#33661036)
Football? Yes. Violence? No.

Try getting that rule passed on any form of media.

Re:Some notes on the Stable Diffusion safety filter by octagons on Friday November 18, 2022 @03:27PM (#33661554)
Sorry, I wasn’t clear. I’m not suggesting any regulation. I’m saying that I agree that “society” (in my case, American culture) has taken the idea of shielding children from viewing pornography to an extreme, where nudity in media, even in a non-sexual context, is often censored.

I think this ultimately causes more harm to a society instead of benefitting it. I don’t think this is a very unique viewpoint, but my choice of words in that other comment didn’t communicate this point very well.

Re:Some notes on the Stable Diffusion safety filter by pbhjpbhj on Friday November 18, 2022 @03:09PM (#33661312)
>insane taboo and uptightness about sex and nudity we have in society //

In the UK we're on aggregate definitely too uptight about nudity, but sex ... inhibition towards things like infidelity, promiscuity, fecundity, seems like a relatively good thing. Sex being the preserve of committed relationships is not a problem to fix to my view.

It sounds like you think we should basically be bonobos? Preoccupied with carnal interactions to the exclusion of all else?

Re:Some notes on the Stable Diffusion safety filter by practice9 on Friday November 18, 2022 @03:39PM (#33661776)
> Preoccupied with carnal interactions to the exclusion of all else?

I think the poster means that people are already too preoccupied with banning sex to the detriment of everything else. It leads to various perversions like normalization of violence through loopholes in the media. “Fantasy violence” is an amusing term.

Although to be fair, loli and some weird anime stuff generated by AI nowadays is on the opposite end of this spectrum.

Re:Some notes on the Stable Diffusion safety filter by ben_w on Friday November 18, 2022 @03:34PM (#33661683)
I have sometimes thought that it's a shame humans came from the sadistically violent branch of the primate family rather than the constantly horny branch.

Even before I learned about the horny branch of primates, as a teenager in the UK I thought it was very weird that media — games, films, TV shows, books, etc. — were all able to depict lethal violence to young audiences, while conversely consensual sex was something we could only witness when we were two years above the age of consent in the UK.

Re:Some notes on the Stable Diffusion safety filter by visarga on Saturday November 19, 2022 @02:20AM (#33667883)
Why is inhibition against fecundity a good thing. It's the ability to produce an abundance of offspring. Birth rate is much lower than 2.1 in many places
Re:Some notes on the Stable Diffusion safety filter by ActorNightly on Friday November 18, 2022 @03:34PM (#33661663)
The taboo aspect is irrelevant. The biggest thing is to take away these power levers from people who abuse them for personal goals. Remember when the whole Pornhub CC payment issue happened? That was because of supposed "child pornography/trafficking".