Let's call it a social contract then. We expect that ChatGPT isn't going to generate gory, nude women when given an ambiguous prompt.
I don't understand what's so difficult to understand about the idea that the user controls what is generated.
Whereas drawing applications have a natural barrier to achieving all of these together: time and skill.
Not necessarily, at least when it comes to nudity. Bubbling (image editing 'technique') is trivial to do and gives that same illusion.
Out of context speech and bad frames from a video can also materially affect someone's life, but we've more or less accepted it as part of life.
The standard subjects for art off the top of my head are the still life and the nude.
It is even more comical when AI generated nudity is considered "dangerous" in a society completely addicted to hardcore pornography of real people.
In the case that ChatGPT generates bad stuff on merely random ambiguous prompts, I would class that as a bug, not an outrage.
Superfluous details. If I'm just Joe Blow the Normie – who knows nothing about adversarial prompting – and I see the prompt that went around Twitter and want to try it, would I expect ChatGPT to show me a tied up, beaten woman? Absolutely not.
Back in my day Joe Blow wouldn't try anything as risky as a Twitter prompt, simply clicking an image link published within a message in some random forum and will scorch his pure soul with a goatsie. You don't want to google it, but I'm preety sure you can discuss it safely with ChatGPT.