Lets say we got to the point of photorealistic human recreation in about 10 years, meaning any modern computer will be able to render any person (as long as a 3d model for then exists) at any age doing whatever they set the render settings to, as if you took a picture of the person actually doing it. This would make the generation of photorealistic fake cp by using 3d models of children possible. Would the resulting cp still be illegal to own? >No actual kids will be harmed by rendering those pics >Anyone will be able to generate their own cp without gaining too much attention
Will cp finally be legal then?
Nathan Ross
How the fuck can someone sleep in a position that uncomfortable, I bet she couldn't walk for an hour after waking up.
Ryan Lopez
Sup Forums.txt
Christopher Perez
OP maybe you could try not being a pedo instead of making these hurr durr legalize cp now!!1 threads.
Xavier Morris
No. Loli and cp tracing is already illegal. The reason being is the fear we won't be able to tell the difference and actual cp will run rampant. Not to mention a moral abiguity.
Blake Baker
where's the fun in that? :3
Adrian Brown
just how big a perv do you have to be to enjoy beating off to children?
Luke Martin
>Will cp finally be legal then? you wish that don't you fucking nigger, kill yourself
Nolan Russell
This. /thread
Asher Green
I'm not even into kids or lolicon. I was actually just curious. Not that you believe me anyway.
Joseph Stewart
ITT OP wants to fuck children
Evan Johnson
In what thread doesn't he? Do you know where you are?
Jacob Murphy
I'd be more worried about the fact that surveillance camera footage and photos would no longer be admissible as evidence in court because the footage could be easily forged.
Thomas Baker
> Only pretending to be a pedophile
Blake Roberts
>be actual cp producer >technology gets developed allowing for realistic renders >still risk ass producing real cp instead of switching to renders such genius
Jackson Rivera
no
Justin Thompson
It's already illegal in the US. The government has already considered this possibility of computers becoming advanced enough to do this.
Christopher Rodriguez
>>Anyone will be able to generate their own cp without gaining too much attention Do you even read wiki leaks, faggot? CIA can already access your shit even if you're on Loonix. Botnet has already won.
Aaron Gomez
you can get kids at a bargian compared to high-end rigs in certain countries
Levi Scott
Sitting like that is dangerous if she were to get into an accident.
Ryder Price
Sitting in any position is dangerous if you get into an accident, you fucking retard.
Luis Brown
Obviously, but that way is more dangerous. >No actual kids will be harmed by rendering those pics >can't even protect a kid using a seatbelt right
Luke White
If those laws had any logic behind, 99% existing cp would be perfectly legal already
Pedohysteria is a convenient excuse for the government to do mass scale spionage and ostracize anybody that questions the status quo
Tyler Howard
kids are very flexible, you will be surprised. That's the reason ballet dancers and gymnasts begin very young.
Noah Gray
there's proof that humans slept like that
Sebastian Russell
>Pedohysteria is a convenient excuse for the government to do mass scale spionage and ostracize
No you miss the central reason, the government themselves is so involved in pedophilia that they only hope to rebound the public's perception by continuing the draconian laws and attitude surrounding it. They always play this kind of game it almost always wins.
Grayson Rivera
Nixon's domestic affairs adviser in 1968: >...by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and then criminalizing it, we could disrupt communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did
Obama on 2016: >If it's technologically possible to make an impenetrable system, where encryption is so strong that there's no key then how do we apprehend the child pornographer?