Unfortunately NSFW in parts. It might be insensitive to circulate the top URL in most US tech workplaces. For those venues, maybe you want to pick out isolated examples instead.

(Example: Half of Case 1 is an anime/manga maid-uniform woman lifting up front of skirt, and leaning back, to expose the crotch of underwear. That's the most questionable one I noticed. It's one of the first things a visitor to the top URL sees.)

▲

UomoNeroNero 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

I’m Italian, and I really struggle to rationalize this attitude. I honestly don’t understand. Maybe it’s because I’m surrounded by 2,500 years of art in which nudity is an essential and predominant element, by people (even in the workplace) who have a relaxed and genuinely democratic view of the subject — but this comment feels totally alien to me. I suppose it’s my own limitation, but I would NEVER have focused attention on this aspect. I don’t know, maybe I’m the one who’s wrong…

	▲	neilv 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		Italy obviously has much rich and beautiful culture, though I don't know it well enough to understand the difference on this point. Does my response to someone else clarify how and why US corporate culture may be different? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45226202

▲

1dom 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

As a non-US citizen - even though I've been the only Brit in remote teams of Americans - I find this really hard to make sense of.

At least in the UK, if I saw this loaded on someone else's screen at work, I might raise an eyebrow initially, but there wouldn't be any consequences that don't first consider context. As soon as the context is provided ("it's comparing AI models, look! Cool, right?!") everyone would get on with their jobs.

What would be the consequence of you viewing this at work?

How would the situation be handled?

Is the problem a HR thing - like, would people get sacked for this? Or is it like a personal conduct/temptation, that colleagues who see it might not be able to restrain themselves or something?

▲

tempodox 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

I think it’s mostly puritanical bigotry.

▲

mensetmanusman 3 days ago | parent [-]

Understanding the complex dynamics that strengthen relationships or weaken men’s resolve for commitment may be enlightening.

	▲	tempodox 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		You’re making my point.

▲

neilv 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

I think one part of it (not all of it) is that the US has a long history of women being sexually harassed in the workplace, in various ways. It's not nearly as bad as it used to be, but it's not fully solved everywhere.

(Note: Statements suggesting that sexual harassment exists at all make some people on the Internet flip out angrily, but I interpret your questions as in good faith, and I'm trying to answer in good faith.)

One example of why that that harassment context is relevant: if you were a woman, wouldn't you think it was insensitive for a male colleague to send you an image that was obviously designed to be sexually suggestive, and with the female as the sex object? Is he consciously harassing you, or just being oblivious to why this is inappropriate?

For a separate reason that this is a problem in the workplace: besides the real impact to morale and how colleagues respect each other, even the most sociopathic US companies want to avoid sexual harassment lawsuits and public scandals.

For reasons like these, and others, if someone, say, posted that isolated maid image to workplace chat, then I think there's a good chance that a manager or HR would say something to the employee if they found out, and/or (without directly referring to that incident) communicate to everyone about appropriate practices.

But if there was a pattern of insensitive/oblivious/creepy behavior by this employee, or if someone complained to manager/HR about the incident, or if there was legal action against the company (regarding this incident, or a different sexual harassment situation), then I guess the employee might be terminated.

If I were a manager in a company, and one of my reports posted an image like this, I'd probably say something quietly to them, and much more gently than the above (e.g., "Uh, that image is a bit in a direction we want to stay away from in the office", or maybe even just the slightest concerned glance), and most people would get it. Just a little learning moment, like we all have many of. But if there were a trickier situation, or I was under orders, I might have to ask HR about it (and if I did, hopefully that particular HR person is helpful, and that particular company is reasonable).

▲

raincole 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I'm really surprised that it can generate the underwear example. Last time I tried Nano Banaba (with safety filter 'off', whatever it means), it refused to generate a 'cursed samurai helmet on an old wooden table with a bleeding dead body underneath, in cartoon style.'

Edit: It still blocks this request.

▲

efilife 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

For anyone confused, the offending example got removed 10 minutes ago

	▲	3 days ago \| parent [-]
		[deleted]

▲

thrdbndndn 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I'm more bothered by the fact that this reference image is clearly a well-made piece of digital art by some artist.

We all know the questionable nature of AI/LLM models, but people in the field usually at least try to avoid directly using other people's copyrighted material in documentation.

I'm not even talking about legality here. It just feels morally wrong to so blatantly use someone else's artwork like this.

▲

coldfoundry 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

I agree that proper permission should be used for these examples, but I’m quite sure the image in question is AI generated. The quality is incredible these days as to what can be generated, and even to a trained eye it’s getting more difficult by the day to tell if its AI or not.

Source of artist: https://x.com/curry3_aiart/status/1947416300822638839

▲

raincole 4 days ago | parent | prev [-]

The reference is AI-generated too. This comment shows how people are susceptible to our existing bias.

▲

kouteiheika 4 days ago | parent [-]

My favorite (or should I say, anti-favorite?) is calling real artists' art AI, which I'm starting to see more and more of, and I've already seen a couple of artists rage-quit social media because of the anti-AI crowd's abuse.

▲

raincole 4 days ago | parent [-]

Yeah that's bad too, but what the parent comment did was the opposite: calling an AI-generated image "clearly a well-made piece of digital art by some artist."

	▲	kouteiheika 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		It boils down to the same thing - it's getting harder to distinguish AI generated art from non-AI art, and since the models are constantly getting better it's only going to get worse.

▲

behnamoh 4 days ago | parent | prev [-]

> Unfortunately NSFW in parts.

This is why we can't have nice things. How about we let the models remain uncensored and you don't generate NSFW with them?

	▲	UberFly 4 days ago \| parent [-]
		You do know what NSFW means, right? They didn't type NSFH.