Do you see an "artistic expression" exception in the law I cite?

Because the Secret Service doesn't: https://thehill.com/blogs/in-the-know/in-the-know/420406-kat...

If you think that concept applies in this case, you'd best stay away from this topic entirely before you get yourself in a lot of trouble.

Again, this is a public service announcement. Not an endorsement, a celebration, a denunciation, a political statement, or anything else. Don't do this, not even playing around, unless you are aware of what you are doing and ready to take the consequences for it.

▲

kurtoid 3 days ago | parent [-]

It would have to go before a court. I think it wouldn't be too hard to convince a jury (or judge) that a head-in-a-basket AI art + description is expression (first amendment) and not a threat

Edit: your first link is a genuine threat. the second one is a picture of someone holding a photo-realistic, mangled head. The head-in-a-basket is neither

▲

jerf 2 days ago | parent [-]

You should stay away from this, in case you haven't figured it out. You're not even in the ballpark of a correct understanding of this situation. Better to just think you could argue your way out of this with a deficient understanding of the law than to put it to the test and find out how wrong you are in a courtroom.

	▲	kurtoid 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		Relax, I have no interest in testing any of this. I'm just shocked that there's so little room for interpretation Sorry if I'm acting dense, it's not on purpose. What am I missing?