• Corroded@leminal.space
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    4 months ago

    The article seems to be mostly about imposing limitations over more taboo sex acts and uses the examples of bondage and vomit.

    It does get into ethics near the end with the following section

    One key difference between AI porn and traditional porn, however, is that adult content creators are human beings who can consent to what they will and will not participate in. AI isn’t conscious, ergo no consent. “It sets up a dynamic where you’re ordering the sex acts that you want, and they’re being delivered,” Lori Watson, a professor at Washington University who has written about the ethics of pornography and sex work, said of AI sexbots. “That’s not how ethical sex works.”

    • SacralPlexus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      4 months ago

      AI isn’t conscious, ergo no consent.

      I’m so confused by this quote and hope there is something that was left out. If something isn’t conscious it seems that consent is not absent - it is inapplicable.

      I challenge anyone to name a situation where consent is logically relevant to something that doesn’t have consciousness (e.g. something other than humans or animals).

    • Corroded@leminal.space
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      Personally I don’t think it would be much less ethical than watching any other adult content. It’s put out there and people use it how they want often without being directly told “You can masturbate to this”

      With AI content there probably wouldn’t be a lot of criminal issues compared to traditional adult content like human trafficking and GirlsDoPorn for example.