X offices raided in France as UK opens fresh investigation into Grok

Post by guerrilla » Wed, Feb 04, 2026, 4:10 AM UTC

anigbrowl wrote: post #407

chrisjj wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are mistaken. Item #1 is "images of children of a pornographic nature". Wheras "CSAM isn’t pornography—it’s evidence of criminal exploitation of kids." https://rainn.org/get-informed/get-the-facts-about-sexual-vi...

A distinction without a difference. Even if some kid makes a video of themselves jerking off for their own personal enjoyment, unprompted by anyone else, if someone else gains access to that (eg a technician at a store or an unprincipled guardian) and makes a copy for themselves they're criminally exploiting the kid by doing so.

Post by bawolff » Wed, Feb 04, 2026, 4:12 AM UTC

cwillu wrote: post #54

Mordisquitos wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do they hope to find, specifically ? Who knows, but maybe the prosecutors have a better awareness of specifics than us HN commenters who have not been involved in the investigation. What may they find, hypothetically? Who knows, but maybe an internal email saying, for instance, 'Management says keep the nude photo functionality, just hide it behind a feature flag' , or maybe 'Great idea to keep a backup of the i…

Or “regulators don't understand the technology; short of turning it off entirely, there's nothing we can do to prevent it entirely, and the costs involved in attempting to reduce it are much greater than the likely fine, especially given that we're likely to receive such a fine anyway.”

Post by ChrisGreenHeur » Wed, Feb 04, 2026, 4:23 AM UTC

moolcool wrote: post #55

Altern4tiveAcc wrote: post #53

> Prosecutors say they are now investigating whether X has broken the law across multiple areas. This step could come before a police raid. This looks like plain political pressure. No lives were saved, and no crime was prevented by harassing local workers.

> This looks like plain political pressure. No lives were saved, and no crime was prevented by harassing local workers. The company made and released a tool with seemingly no guard-rails, which was used en masse to generate deepfakes and child pornography.

Post by trhway » Wed, Feb 04, 2026, 4:25 AM UTC

moolcool wrote: post #55

Altern4tiveAcc wrote: post #53

> Prosecutors say they are now investigating whether X has broken the law across multiple areas. This step could come before a police raid. This looks like plain political pressure. No lives were saved, and no crime was prevented by harassing local workers.

> This looks like plain political pressure. No lives were saved, and no crime was prevented by harassing local workers. The company made and released a tool with seemingly no guard-rails, which was used en masse to generate deepfakes and child pornography.

Post by lysp » Wed, Feb 04, 2026, 4:57 AM UTC

guerrilla wrote: post #441

anigbrowl wrote: post #407

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A distinction without a difference. Even if some kid makes a video of themselves jerking off for their own personal enjoyment, unprompted by anyone else, if someone else gains access to that (eg a technician at a store or an unprincipled guardian) and makes a copy for themselves they're criminally exploiting the kid by doing so.

Seems like a pretty big difference. It's got to be worse to actually do something to somone in real life than not do that .