Labour Urged to Address Loophole Allowing AI 'Paedophile Manuals' Online

[Social Media]

 

Labour is being urged to take immediate action to ban AI-generated "paedophile manuals" that provide instructions on creating child abuse images and videos. The Internet Watch Foundation (IWF), a watchdog based in Cambridge, has highlighted a critical loophole in current legislation that allows these dangerous guides to be shared openly online. This call to action comes amidst growing concerns over the exploitation of artificial intelligence (AI) to generate illegal and harmful content.

 

Since 2014, the law has prohibited the downloading or possession of so-called "grooming manuals," which are used by abusers to instruct others on how to target victims. However, the IWF has identified a significant gap in the law that enables paedophiles to share detailed instructions on creating AI-generated child sexual abuse images without facing legal repercussions. Dan Sexton, Chief Technology Officer at the IWF, emphasized the need for immediate government intervention to address this issue.

 

Sexton described the situation, stating, "There is a very experienced technical community among abusers who are training, helping, and skilling up others. It is possible now to share a guide and all the open-source tools openly, and it is only illegal once you have created an image." He called for "prompt action from the new government" to close this loophole and prevent the distribution of these harmful guides.

 

The IWF, which works to block child abuse images from the web, conducted a "snapshot" study of a dark web forum in March and April of this year. They discovered 3,512 illegal child abuse images generated by AI, a significant increase from the 2,978 images found in a September survey. Notably, the number of "category A" images, the most severe type depicting rape, torture, or bestiality, rose from 22% to 32% in the latest study.

 

With the advancement of AI tools, it has become increasingly easy to generate highly photorealistic images using only text prompts. Sexton noted, "The realism has improved. We know it’s synthetic, but it looks real enough to pass as a real child." This alarming development underscores the urgent need for regulatory measures to prevent the misuse of AI for creating child abuse images.

 

The IWF has proposed several recommendations to address this issue. They suggest making it an offense to use personal data to create AI models that can generate abuse images. Additionally, they advocate for banning AI chatbots from initiating sexual communications with children and blocking "nudifying" apps that can remove clothing from images without consent. These measures aim to curb the misuse of AI technology in perpetuating child abuse.

 

One concerning aspect highlighted by the IWF is the modification of freely available AI software to create abuse images. Sexton revealed that there is "clear evidence" of abuse imagery being generated using an AI tool known as Stable Diffusion, initially developed by British start-up Stability AI. He explained, "The evidence is very clear. The foundation models that are being referenced - it has been early versions of Stable Diffusion."

 

While Stability AI has stated its commitment to preventing the misuse of AI and prohibiting the use of their image models for unlawful activities, the availability of such technology remains a significant concern. The IWF also warned against plans by OpenAI, the company behind ChatGPT, to "responsibly" allow its technology to create adult images. Sexton expressed "obvious concerns" that such tools could be misused.

 

A government spokesperson responded to the IWF's report, saying, "We welcome the Internet Watch Foundation report and will carefully consider their recommendations. We are committed to further measures to keep children safe online and go after those that would cause harm, including where AI is used to do so." Despite these assurances, there is an urgent need for concrete legislative action to address the growing threat posed by AI-generated child abuse content.

 

Some officials in Whitehall had anticipated that Labour would unveil plans for an AI Bill, which would include new safety measures. However, this was notably absent from last week’s King’s Speech, raising concerns about the government's commitment to tackling this issue. In response to inquiries, an OpenAI spokesperson stated, "We have strong safeguards to prevent deepfakes or the creation or spreading of material harmful to children." Stability AI has been contacted for further comments on this matter.

 

As AI technology continues to advance, the potential for its misuse in creating and distributing harmful content increases. The urgent call from the IWF and other concerned organizations highlights the need for swift legislative action to close existing loopholes and protect children from online exploitation. Labour and the government must prioritize addressing this issue to ensure the safety and well-being of vulnerable individuals in the digital age.

 

Credit: Daily Telegraph 2024-07-23

 

Get our Daily Newsletter - Click HERE to subscribe

[john donson]

soon all the sex content creators will be unemployed and cry ?

[Chomper Higgot]

It’s shocking how soon a new technology is co-opted by perverts and people who see selling heinous crimes to perverts as a market opportunity.

[JonnyF]

Highly unlikely Labour are going to go after this type of thing. 

 

They are far more likely to take a soft approach to "minor attracted persons" or whatever flowery 'compassionate' label they put on them. 

[Chomper Higgot]

15 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Highly unlikely Labour are going to go after this type of thing. 

 

They are far more likely to take a soft approach to "minor attracted persons" or whatever flowery 'compassionate' label they put on them. 

Odious slur.

 

But to be expected.

[JonnyF]

2 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Odious slur.

 

If only.

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2562555/Labours-child-sex-apologists-How-three-partys-senior-figures-campaigned-vile-paedophile-group-probed-police-abusing-children-industrial-scale.html

[Captain Flack]

I have removed a reported post that used the deliberate wrong spelling of a paper’s name.

 

Please note  if you report a post, do not then post a reply with your own censored version of that post, as once the reported post is removed, all replies will also be removed.

[RayC]

4 hours ago, JonnyF said:

Highly unlikely Labour are going to go after this type of thing. 

 

They are far more likely to take a soft approach to "minor attracted persons" or whatever flowery 'compassionate' label they put on them. 

 

I doubt that the current Labour government will take as "soft" an approach to the activities of paedophile groups as the Tory government of the '80s did.

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Westminster_paedophile_dossier&wprov=rarw1

[JonnyF]

10 minutes ago, RayC said:

 

I doubt that the current Labour government will take as "soft" an approach to the activities of paedophile groups as the Tory government of the '80s did.

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Westminster_paedophile_dossier&wprov=rarw1

 

I don't doubt it all.

 

Look at Labour in the 70's.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/mar/02/how-paedophiles-infiltrated-the-left-harriet-harman-patricia-hewitt

 

And they still won't apologize to this day.

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2567054/But-wont-say-sorry-Labours-Harman-Dromey-finally-break-silence-links-paedophile-group.html

 

[Chomper Higgot]

23 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

I don't doubt it all.

 

Look at Labour in the 70's.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/mar/02/how-paedophiles-infiltrated-the-left-harriet-harman-patricia-hewitt

 

And they still won't apologize to this day.

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2567054/But-wont-say-sorry-Labours-Harman-Dromey-finally-break-silence-links-paedophile-group.html

 

If we are going back to the 70s do we get to include Ted Heath?

 

Or should we just stick to the topic of the thread?

[JonnyF]

11 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

If we are going back to the 70s do we get to include Ted Heath?

 

Or should we just stick to the topic of the thread?

 

Ask RayC. He's the one taking it back 50 years.

[RayC]

3 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

Ask RayC. He's the one taking it back 50 years.

 

Why ask me? You started the trip down memory lane with your original post.

[RayC]

44 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

I don't doubt it all.

 

Look at Labour in the 70's.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/mar/02/how-paedophiles-infiltrated-the-left-harriet-harman-patricia-hewitt

 

And they still won't apologize to this day.

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2567054/But-wont-say-sorry-Labours-Harman-Dromey-finally-break-silence-links-paedophile-group.html

 

 

Dromey is dead. Harman is no longer an MP and Hewitt's last political job was as an advisor to the former Tory Chancellor, Jeremy Hunt, so how that leads you to conclude that the current Labour government will take a soft approach to paedophiles is beyond me.

 

My previous post contained a link which illustrated a soft approach to paedophilia. In fact, the link outlined what was possible criminal neglect of his duties by a Tory Home Secretary.

[JonnyF]

4 minutes ago, RayC said:

so how that leads you to conclude that the current Labour government will take a soft approach to paedophiles is beyond me.

 

Well they still party with them.

 

https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/splash-labour-mayor-partied-paedophile-councillor-after-learning-his-arrest-photos-reveal

 

 

[RayC]

8 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

Well they still party with them.

 

https://morningstaronline.co.uk/article/splash-labour-mayor-partied-paedophile-councillor-after-learning-his-arrest-photos-reveal

 

 

 

Which proves what?

 

In any event, Granville resigned as Mayor of Hackney and is, quite rightly, suspended from the Labour party while any allegations of wrongdoing are investigated.

 

In terms of wrongdoing, imo a Tory Home Secretary overlooking the possible existence of a paedophile ring involving MPs, senior civil servants, etc far outweighs this incident in scope and severity.

[JonnyF]

5 minutes ago, RayC said:

Which proves what?

 

That members of the Labour party hang out with and party with Paedos. 

[RayC]

1 minute ago, JonnyF said:

 

That members of the Labour party hang out with and party with Paedos. 

 

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/paedophile-ex-tory-mp-released-29271704

 

Presumably by the same logic, you will then also agree that this article proves that members of the Conservative Parliamentary Party are paedos?

[JonnyF]

10 minutes ago, RayC said:

 

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/paedophile-ex-tory-mp-released-29271704

 

Presumably by the same logic, you will then also agree that this article proves that members of the Conservative Parliamentary Party are paedos?

 

Maybe you could start a thread on the Conservative party allowing AI Paedophile manuals online?

 

Because this one is about the Labour party. 

[Chomper Higgot]

10 minutes ago, RayC said:

 

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/paedophile-ex-tory-mp-released-29271704

 

Presumably by the same logic, you will then also agree that this article proves that members of the Conservative Parliamentary Party are paedos?

And failed to do anything about the subject use of AI by perverts, leaving it for Labour to sort out.

 

Hence all the deflection and whataboutary.

[Chomper Higgot]

1 minute ago, JonnyF said:

 

Maybe you could start a thread on the Conservative party allowing AI Paedophile manuals online?

 

Because this one is about the Labour party. 

 It clear that’s precisely what happened.

 

Now it’s for Labour to sort out yet another Tory failure.

 

 

Edited July 23 by Chomper Higgot

[RayC]

8 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

Maybe you could start a thread on the Conservative party allowing AI Paedophile manuals online?

 

Because this one is about the Labour party. 

 

No this thread is not about the Labour Party, it is about a loophole in a law - introduced by a Tory government - which allows the downloading of some paedophile manuals.

 

Your posts in this thread are no more than tawdry implications that the Labour government is somehow complacent when it comes to paedophilia and have no merit whatsoever.

[James105]

6 hours ago, RayC said:

 

No this thread is not about the Labour Party, it is about a loophole in a law - introduced by a Tory government - which allows the downloading of some paedophile manuals.

 

Your posts in this thread are no more than tawdry implications that the Labour government is somehow complacent when it comes to paedophilia and have no merit whatsoever.

 

The law was introduced in 2014 and this was not possible then.   I expect that is also why the Tories also didn't introduce any laws around what people are allowed to do in things that are yet to be invented like a "holodeck" either, but no doubt in 100 years someone will harp back to a 2014 bill claiming the Tories were responsible for that too.  

 

Anyway, who was in charge of the Crown Prosecution Service in 2009 that decided not to prosecute the Jimmy Saville?   Wasn't that the leader of the Labour party?

Edited July 23 by James105

[Nick Carter icp]

18 hours ago, Social Media said:

This call to action comes amidst growing concerns over the exploitation of artificial intelligence (AI) to generate illegal and harmful content.

 

   Why not just let them get on with it . 

No real Children are involved and no one is harmed and it may stop real images being produced ?

[RayC]

7 hours ago, James105 said:

 

The law was introduced in 2014 and this was not possible then.   I expect that is also why the Tories also didn't introduce any laws around what people are allowed to do in things that are yet to be invented like a "holodeck" either, but no doubt in 100 years someone will harp back to a 2014 bill claiming the Tories were responsible for that too.  

 

Anyway, who was in charge of the Crown Prosecution Service in 2009 that decided not to prosecute the Jimmy Saville?   Wasn't that the leader of the Labour party?

 

It may not have been possible to generate AI images in 2014 but it certainly was in June 2024 (and a few years prior to that) so why didn't the Tory government amend the law to close this loophole when it was in office?

 

The links below give an explanation of Starmer's role in the Saville case. 

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/politics/2023/dec/21/keir-starmer-not-told-about-dropping-of-jimmy-savile-case-say-sources-dpp-labour

 

https://fullfact.org/online/keir-starmer-prosecute-jimmy-savile/