As I go on my reluctant censorship rampage, I find out how hard it is to feel like I'm making consistent judgments.

For instance, there's absolutely no reason to purge a totally realistic image of... say, a waterfall, or someone drinking a cup of coffee (the totally normal way, that is, without being stabbed or shot or gutted while enjoying your morning joe). It's not just realism itself that's the issue.

I'm inclined to let even realistic gory stuff go if you could get away with it in an R-rated movie, and it doesn't look like a crime being committed.

Underage realism is a no-go for being hosted directly on Gurochan, no matter the absence of gore or level of gore. (To some people's great surprise, however, links to FAKE underage-appearing content are allowed.)

Hi galathien -
May I draw your attention to >>>/dis/25557?
Perhaps you can answer it yourself or you could point your moderating and administrating colleagues to it.
Have a nice day/night/time.

>>30995
> Perhaps you can answer it yourself or you could point your moderating and administrating colleagues to it.

I've recently been upgraded from mere "janitor" to full moderator, but what you're asking for would require an update to the board software to provide, which is still out of my scope. I can suggest your idea, however, to the Powers That Be.

It might be helpful to everyone, to pin this thread to the top of the AI board.

>It's not just realism itself that's the issue.

I totally agree. Have been thinking a lot about the "photo realism" problem,
so I'll give a definition a try, just to make it a bit easier hopefully.

First of all, we need to look at the fact, that "Is it real?" is the topmost of all rules
on GC, not only regarding AI, but everything. If it is real, you're out. full stop. ... but
what is the spirit of that rule? (yes, I am one of those).

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. There is the lower "does it interest us?" rule. In my opinion a real photo
of something completely harmless may on very rare occasion be tolerated, if it does contribute in
a meaningful way to the board and can not be substituted otherwise.

In general, anything real has to go.
"real" meaning, an actual photograph or video or even if one of those was just used in the creation of something else.
A celebrity-fake that has been altered with an artistic photo-filter to look like a painting still counts as real,
because the real thing was part of the process creating it.

Now here's where it gets complicated especially with AI.
If AI is used to alter something real, or during the training process something real was used,
the above of course applies. For the most part, we don't know if that happened, often maybe even the artist creating
something with AI doesn't know. This is just a point for arguments sake.

Most of the time, AI creations are not real and do not even contain parts of something real.
That is, where the term "realistic" / "photorealistic" becomes important.

Even though it is NOT real, or based on something real, could it be mistaken for the real thing
by someone of sound mind who is not sympathetic to our interests outside of Gurochan?
If so, it counts as realistic.

Now, the problem especially with good (well made) AI videos is, that you may have to take a longer look at it,
to find some proof that it was made artificially and still doubts may remain.
That means, that videos and particularly the preview images of those can be problematic because they can easily
be mistaken for the real thing at a quick glance. And that means those can not be directly on Gurochan.

The same goes for images. (!) Uploading the video elsewhere and posting a photorealistic preview image on Gurochan
still puts something of that nature on the board.

Naturally the same is true for images that are not related to videos.

All the above mostly concerns AI creations, where a realistic art-style is used in creation, but we're seeing more and more of those,
since many people like that very much.
What to do?

You want others to enjoy the art you created, that is absolutely understandable.
If you are working with a realistic art-style, using AI, you are a bit on thin ice, when uploading to Gurochan.

But you have options:

1) Use content, that can not be misinterpreted as something real. e.g.:
A Dragon, devouring a Girl would not be mistaken by anyone of sound mind for being real, no matter if it is an image or a video.
Be creative. Straight shootings, beheadings and so forth will be a problem. Zombies, Orcs, anything fantasy will not.

2) But I don't like fantasy, I want something realistic... sure. Many do. Upload that on a different host and post a preview here.
You can also do that with images, not only videos (!) Put on some elbow-grease and create a preview, using a different art-style,
showing the content to expect. Let's say you created images or a video of very realistic looking shootings.
Take a single image and run it through a manga-style art filter. Post that image as a preview. OR leave the style,
but put something IN the preview image that makes 100% believable, that this was made using AI.

Lot of work? Maybe. But remember that this is only necessary, if your creation falls into the category "photorealistic".
If you want to show those creations, put in the effort, or run the heightened risk to have them deleted.
Nobody wants that!

>>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.

>We'd have to ban all AI realism
Of course. I didn't mean it like that, was thinking along the lines of lora training and
mostly involvement of real CP in that case.

>celebrity fakes
I don't care about those, apart from the fact, that people with money and power might be a problem for the board.
thought that the "nothing real" rule should cover that anyway.
On the other hand, I myself made a manga involving some British Royals a while back (unpublished) it is a manga,
and a story featuring some real people and some fantasy girls (reality / fantasy crossover you know, like roger rabbit).
The real persons are so far mentioned just in name only, but still... glass house, bricks...
Actually I haven't seen anything like celeb-fakes on Gurochan so far, but maybe I just missed it. Doesn't appear to be a problem.
I used that as an example for a case, where something real had been altered to look obviously fake, but still would
be a problem, since the real nature of the original would be still recognizable.

>if someone needs a knife or a coffee cup or a dildo as a prop
totally agree. was going to mention that and put emphasis on persons, especially children, but...

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

... I didn't want my post to look like yet another loli-fan bashing, which it is not.
I do however think, that given the nature of most international politics, this is the topic with the highest potential
of endangering the board and therefore should be handled with caution.

my idea was to create a guideline along which lines to think when posting AI content with realistic style to the board,
since the same questions and misunderstandings seem to occur again and again.
Maybe it would be helpful, to put here some links to examples how to do it right.
What not to do is harder to visually explain, since it gets deleted.

just two quick examples no specific reason for my choice picked the first I saw:

>>30966
that image is still a bit problematic imo. This is a typical filter often used on photos,
so it could be just an altered photography which would be "real"

>>30923
this image on the other hand uses realism, but is for very obvious reasons not real at all.
(not a "fake" which could still mean real. damned terminology.)
but as I mentioned above, something like this depends on the kind of content and not everyone wants to do "fantasy".

Still, I said it before in another discussion:
the problem with slapping some cat's ears on something that looks 100% like real CP is,
that it does not change the nature or perception of the content.

post 30923 on the other hand makes very clear, that this is not real and more important not realistic.
at least in my opinion. no idea what lawyers, depending on the country would say to that,
but again just in my opinion this one does not contradict the rules of Gurochan
and that should be enough.

>>30996

TY for your consideration.
I think my issue is not a specific AI-related, so I switch back to the thread with my original question: >>>/dis/25596