Re: At what point do artificial images become "wrong"?
"The trial evidence cited by the government includes a secretly-made recording of a minor (a cousin) undressing and showering, and other videos of children participating in sex acts."
In this case the AI generated material was incidental and arguably could have been omitted with the court still bringing in the same verdict and applying the same sentence.
The question of how far does a liberal society wish to go in censoring and criminalizing purely privately generated images is a reasonable one. What general principles and rationales should apply?
When you move away from this obviously extremely sensitive context to asking apparently stupid questions like "should privately generated animations of Max Headroom 'doing' Shrek's donkey", leaving aside copyright issues, be a criminal act? (AFAIK bestiality is generally illegal.)
Obviously ridiculous and I imagine most would see this portrayal Max's activities as a relatively harmless, if tasteless, waste of time. This poses the question of why this situation is apparently trivial and others would draw the ire of the full force of the state. Hypotheses non fingo.
As an example I would not use the Simpsons as the internet has apparently generated everything the depraved mind might have conceived.
Just about everything that could potentially contribute so much to our world has been perverted and befouling our lives. Someone has apparently coined a very apt word for this process of degradation viz "enshitification"