>>31025
> I think that a real photo of a pot of coffee, a landscape or maybe even an animal is not very problematic, but still unwanted.

True, but I didn't bother to get into that because off-topic posts are a separate issue, and even using an external link won't fix off-topicness.

> If AI is used to alter something real, or during the training process something real was used

How directly a specific real person is involved can matter, but AI realism for humans is based on composites of many (hundreds, thousands, millions?) real people. We'd have to ban all AI realism if any connection to real people whatsoever was disqualifying.

Further, AFAIK, we haven't banned celebrity fakes here (not that I've seen many anyway). The EU is going hard on that issue now (mainly to protect politicians who themselves don't want to appear in AI porn 😄), but the Gurochan Powers That Be will have to decide if we are going to care about that as a vulnerability to legal trouble or not.

Also, if someone needs a knife or a coffee cup or a dildo as a prop, and directly uses a real one of these in an AI video, there's no reason for us to give a damn.

The biggest realism no-no is using a particular real child for AI porn.