You didnt even address my link, this is why you are being called out as a bad-faith actor.

They put it behind a paywall and didn't fix it, according to more recent lawsuits than that article.

Also, failed to correctly notify authorities even when they eventually notified them at all.

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.cand.46...

Elon initially sold xAI as having a spicy mode and being politically incorrect.

It was only deemed a bug when it became a liability - you can't simply rewrite history and expect it to go unnoticed.

> If no images are released on the internet (and users consume them privately), no one is harmed in the process.

Yikes.

A. They were released all over the internet - from the article..

> The chatbot has a public account on X, where users can ask it questions or request alterations to images. Users flocked to the social media site, in many cases asking Grok to remove clothing in images of women and children, after which the bot publicly posted the A.I.-generated images.

B. There is a bunch of data about consumers of CSAM 'content escalating' and eventually attempting to make real contact with minors.

C. They were sexualizing pictures of real people and posting the pictures online.

> One of the young plaintiffs said she found out about the imagery after she received an anonymous message on Instagram pointing her toward images and videos, including her high school yearbook photo, which had been altered to show her in sexually explicit actions and full nudity.

The material was being shared on a Discord server, a private chat space on that platform, and included similar imagery that had also been altered using Grok of at least 18 other women who were minors, according to the complaint.

> Tools are neutral.

Ha.

Tools are neutral so we shouldn't do anything to reduce the possibility of someone consuming alcohol while or right before driving. Tools are neutral, so we shouldn't do anything to mitigate blatantly obvious risks, in fact we should actively engage in the risky behavior, just to show how neutral the tool is!

Grok was replying to public posts on X with the compromising deepfakes. Musk was actively joking about it right up until many countries blocked it, and several European countries, India, South Korea, Australia, Canada and Brazil all started investigations against X for violating local laws against producing intimate imagery without consent. Internet companies often enjoy a lot of leeway for cases where their safety measures are bypassed and they take reasonable actions to mitigate or respond to bypasses, that evaporates when they openly support the abuse.

A user would go into a women's x profile, find a recent post and publicly @ the grokbot to remove her clothes. You don't believe that this is a well thought out and acceptable design and no fault lies with X?

read any of your other replies

Starkly different. One was a well meaning attempt to squash model bias gone wrong, the other is a deliberately inserted bias. Even ignoring all that, whataboutism is not persuasive.