I recently commented on the topic of AI and personalized porn, which is a development the elites do not seem to like very much. This is an interesting topic, so it is worth going into a bit more depth. First, here is my original comment:

We have been talking about how AI is leading to the democratization and personalization of porn. However, the powers that be do not like that at all. Currently, there is the attempt to establish the term ”synthetic non-consensual intimate images” (synthetic NCIIs). You can’t make this up. You can bet that some WHO or UN faggots have plans according to which you are only allowed to masturbate to fat, black women and getting a boner for any images you create of your dream slut, anime/Asian or white, will lead to you getting your CBDCs wiped and six weeks at a reeducation camp.

Check this out:
https://public-assets.graphika.com/reports/graphika-report-a-revealing-picture.pdf
There is already b.s. chatter about the “ethics” of AIs (not the ethical use of AI itself). It is only a small step to take these two pieces, i.e. claiming that AIs have human right or some bullshit, and the concept of synthetic NCIIs, to justify the banning of all user-generated pornography. Much bigger leaps of logic and non-sequiturs have been successfully pushed onto the public.

First, the bigger problem the elites want to solve is how to remove all beauty from the world. This affects your personal life as well. There are no hot women in Western movies and video games anymore because those would supposedly represent “outdated beauty standards”. Obviously, markers of female beauty have a very simple evolutionary explanation. In short, they simply signify fertility. That is all. Then, there is the unpleasant fact that white and Asian women are generally considered the most attractive. This is not some kind of right-wing wet dream. Despite decades of propaganda, there are not a lot of white men who marry black women whereas is seems that among very successful black men, i.e. rappers and athletes, it is not at all uncommon that they prefer white women. I even recall once hearing a rap song in which the singer’s persona “only fucks white bitches”, just like they all drive lambos, love bling, and stack money. Rap is aspirational music for the target demographic, so it is significant that white women show up as obvious status symbol. Ghetto blacks, on the other hand, may only get the trashiest of white women whom white guys look down upon, but even those convey high status to them.

Mainstream media manipulation has reached a staggering level. The last time I looked up recent Disney movies, I don’t think I came across even one white female lead. Western video games, as well as Japanese ones that are supposed to appeal to Western tastes, are likewise either full of ugly white women or some kind of minority. Several big studios got shut down due to subsequent lackluster sales, such as Volition (Saints Row) and Square Enix’ subsidiary Luminous Productions (Forspoken). The recently released Alan Wake II, the sequel to a supposed cult game that is actually total crap, is not selling well. Spiderman 2, with the ultra ugly female, did not exactly bomb but it is not on track to recuperating its ludicrous $315m budget. We also know that The Last of Us, Part II, featuring a mystery meat main character, was commercially disappointing. Money is just a concept, though. What is more important is that there are no attractive women in the game. They want to demoralize you and once you have your life energy sapped out of you after dozens of hours looking at ugly women in games, you are presumably expected to realize that every chick is beautiful, in her own personal way.

One of the benefits of PC gaming is that there are modders who are willing to fix the mistakes developers have made, for instance prettying up the cast of the gay-sex simulator Baldur’s Gate III and de-diversifying it in other ways as well. Doing this is of course against the TOS of Nexus Mods, the largest website for PC mods. Just as the subversive, ultra-hostile elites wanted to, and managed to, destroy traditions in Western architecture, visual arts, and music, they are now going after the time-honored tradition of getting sexually aroused by women on-screen, be it actresses or video game protagonists. You are simply a bigot if you want to look at attractive women.

Generative AI can help us fight back against the elites, who have been gradually losing control anyway, which is why they have been getting so unhinged. Today, you can already create pictures of your virtual dream slut, and progress on video generation has been quite impressive, so this frontier will soon fall. This puts you in the position to skip the tranny and black-on-white-porn-infested mainstream porn sites. Instead, get your own virtual avatar and make her work, any way you please.

Personalized porn could be the solution, but the elites are working hard on laying the groundwork for banning this kind of content because to them, this would be a disaster, similar to woke games bombing so hard that they lead to the collapse of entire game studios. There is the concept of “non-consensual intimate images” (NCIIs), which does not quite mean what you think it does. Originally, the term was “non-consensual distribution of intimate images”, but distribution is no longer relevant; they also don’t want to mention possession, so the entire underlying reality needs to be mangled. It sounds as if NCIIs are the result of people secretly taking intimate pictures of others. Such pictures probably form a subset of NCIIs, albeit an extremely small one, but the majority case are pictures that some horny women sent you, for whatever reason, and later wishes she had not done so. For instance, if on a dating site some slut sends you naked pictures, and you spread them around, then these have magically become NCIIs, just like the pictures you take of very willing participants in your sexual activities you decide to simply pump and dump. Before you know it, you are in possession of NCIIs. That consent can be withdrawn after the fact may seem utterly laughable, but this is the world we currently live in. This is similar to rape cases: if you pump-and-dump a chick who was expecting to get into a relationship with you, you immediately turn into a rapist ex post facto.

The concept of NCIIs has been extended to take into account the powers of generative AI. There are also synthetic NCIIs, for instance if you take naked pics of some slut you banged and you make her tits a big bigger, or, worse, if you improve her visual appearance overall. Clearly, even though you have received the source images without any strings attached, the fact that you modify those pictures means that they are now “non-consensual” because those women did not consent to you fixing what nature could not, and they are “synthetic” because you modified them, so that they no longer resemble the source.

Now, remember that the mainstream has been seeding the message that AIs are “sentient”. This is a decades-long project, not much younger than AI as a research field. A very well-known example is the sentient computer HAL in Stanley Kubrik’s 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968). Other movies with a similar message are Steven Spielberg’s A.I. Artificial Intelligence, released in 2001 (!), and Spike Jonze’s movie Her (2013). About a year and a half there was also a ludicrous story about some faggot at Google claiming that their chatbot is sentient. There is even an entire subfield of philosophy, ethics of artificial intelligence, in which people who know basically nothing about technology waffle about human rights for AIs and robots.

All pieces are now in place, so I can conclude with the coup de grâce: My claim is that there is a concerted effort underway to outlaw AI-generated porn. There is enough evidence to support the belief that at some point, the powers that be will claim that by using generative AI in order to create images and videos of sexually attractive non-existing women, you violate globally agreed-upon ethical standards for interacting with AI systems, which were negotiated a the UN, WHO, or WEF. After all, these AIs did not consent to being used for such activities. Thus, your using an AI to generate videos and images of imaginary super sluts that exactly correspond to your sexual preferences makes your actions fully comparable to someone who uses or modifies pictures of a real woman, e.g. in the case where you ask an AI to produce 50 porn clips using the likeness of the e-thot of the day (right now, this seems to be Hannah Owo). Potentially years in prison will await you for subjecting an AI to this kind of non-consensual activity, regardless of whether you want material of a real or imaginary woman. Of course, we ignore the fact that due to modern video filters supposedly real women are essentially hybrid-AI products already anyway. The key message is simply that user-generated personalized porn is bad and you are supposed to go to prison for it. However, given the recent track record of our elites, I have my doubts that it will come to this. At the rate things are going, there is a good chance that the current order collapses well before any of this comes to fruition.