I brought up Section 230 because it used to be that removal of Section 230 was an active discussion in the US, particularly for Twitter, pre-Elon, but seems to have fallen away.
With content generated by the platform, it certainly seems reasonable to understand how Section 230 applies, if it all, and I in particular think that Section 230 protections should probably be removed for X in particular.
You are correct; I read your earlier post as "did we forget our already established principle"? I admit I'm a bit tilted by X doing this. In my defense, there are people making the "blame the user, not the tool" argument here though, which is the core idea of section 230
I believe he thinks the same applies to Grok or whatever is done on the platform. The fact that "@grok do xyz" makes it instanteous doesn't mean you should do it.
Anyways, super cool that anyone speaking out already has their SSN in his DB.
> X is planning to purge users generating content that the platform deems illegal, including Grok-generated child sexual abuse material (CSAM).
Which is moderating/censoring.
The tool (Grok) will not be updated to limit it - that's all. Why? I have no idea, but it seems lately that all these AI tools have more freedom than us humans.
If you want to be an actress and you are 14 years old, you now have to worry about tools that make porn of you.
If you are an ordinary woman that wants to share photos with your friends on instagram, you now have to worry about people making porn of you!
The one above is not my opinion (although I partially agree with it, and now you can downvote this one :D ). To be honest, I don't care at all about X nor about an almost trillionaire.
It was full of bots before, now it's full of "AI agents". It's quite hard sometimes to navigate through that ocean of spam, fake news, etc.
Grok makes it easier, but it's still ugly and annoying to read 90-95% always the same posts.
Weird. Why do people get in trouble for using the word "cis" on twitter?
It’s against the TOS to post a picture of your own boobs for example.
2) X still has an ethical and probably legal obligation to remove these images from their platform, even if they are somehow found not to be responsible for generating them, even though they generated them.
That's interesting - do you have a link for this? I'd be curious to know more of the section's details.
“The information must be "provided by another information content provider", i.e., the defendant must not be the "information content provider" of the harmful information at issue”
If grok is generating these images, I am interpreting this as Twitter could be becoming an information content provider. I couldn’t find any relevant rulings but I doubt any exist since services like Grok are relatively new.
The very first AI code generators had this issue that user could make illegal content by making specific requests. A lot of people, me including, saw this as a problem, and there were a few copyright lawsuits arguing this. The courts however did not seem to be very sympathetic to this argument, putting the blame on the user rather than the platform.
Here is hoping that Grok forces regulations to decide on this subject once and for all.
IMO, the fact that you would say this is further evidence of rape culture infecting the world. I assure you that people do care about this.
And friction and quality matters. When you make it easier to generate this content and make the content more convincing, the number of people who do this will go up by orders of magnitude. And when social media platforms make it trivial to share this content you've got a sea change in this kind of harassment.
Convincingly photoshopping someones face onto a nude body takes time, skills, effort, and access to resources.
Grok lowers the barrier to be less effort than it took for either you or I to write our comments.
It is now a social phenomenon where almost every public image of a woman or girl on the site is modified in this manner. Revenge porn photoshops happened before, but not to this scale or in this type of phenomenon.
And there is safety in numbers. If one person photoshops a highschool classmate nude, they might find themself on a registry. For lack of knowing the magnitude, if myriad people are doing it around the country, then do you expect everyone doing that to be litigated that extensively?
Hold on to that spirit and I think you'll genuinely do well in the world that's coming next.
This site.
Mate, thats the point. I as a normal human being, who had never been on 4chan or the darker corners of reddit would have never seen or be able to make frankenporn. much less so make _convincing_ frankenporn.
> For lack of knowing the magnitude
Fuck that shit, if they didn't know the magnitude they wouldn't have spend ages making the photoshop to do it. You don't spend ages doing revenge, "because you didn't know the magnitude" You spend ages doing it because you want revenge
> if myriad people are doing it around the country, then do you expect everyone doing that to be litigated that extensively?
I mean we put people in prison for drink driving, lots of people do that in the states, same with drug dealing. Same with harassment, thats why restraining orders exist.
but
You are missing the point, Making and distributing CSAM is an illegal offence. Knowingly storing and transmitting it is an offence. Musk could stop it all now by re-training grok, or putting in some basic controls.
If any other person was doing this they would have been threatened with company ending action by now.
We mostly agree, so let me clarify.
Grok is being used to make very much revenge porn, including CSAM revenge porn, and people _are using X because it's the CSAM app_. I think this is all bad. We agree here.
"For lack of knowing the magnitude" is me stating that I do not know the number of people using X to generate CSAM. I don't know if it is a thousand, a million, a hundred million, etc. So, I used the word "myriad" instead of "thousands", "millions", etc.
I am arguing that this is worse because the scale is so much more. I am arguing against the argument equivocating this with photoshop.
> If any other person was doing this they would have been threatened with company ending action by now.
Yes, I agree. X is still available on both app stores. This means CSAM is just being made more and more normal. I think this is very bad.
Also, this always existed in one form or another. Draw, photoshop, imagine, discuss imaginary intercourse with popular person online or irl
It's not worthy of intervention because it will happen anyway and it doesn't fundamentally change much