Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Grok is enabling mass sexual harassment on Twitter

seangoedecke.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–59 of 59 posts

Re: Grok is enabling mass sexual harassment on Twitter

#51

Post by jmye »

maxerickson wrote: post #46
insin wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is damage-as-a-service, free of charge and as anonymous as your account, plus automatic distribution of the results to the victim and for all to see.

Right, who is swinging the hammer? Is it the user that asks for it to be swung or is it the thing that responds by swinging?

I dunno, I think a significant amount of fault lies with the developers who were either too stupid and too bad at software to create a tool that couldn’t create CSAM, or were too vile to enable the restriction.

I also think people who defend that kind of software are in dire need of significant introspection.

Re: Grok is enabling mass sexual harassment on Twitter

#52

Post by kccoder »

jebronie wrote: post #12
tokai wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, you are missing the aspect of distribution.

I'm not missing anything. An act is either immoral or not.

Creating CSAM or non-consensual sexually explicit images of others in photoshop is immoral. If you can’t see that then you need to take an ethics course.

Re: Grok is enabling mass sexual harassment on Twitter

#53

Post by 152334H »

dfajgljsldkjag wrote: post #29
metalcrow wrote: post #19

I'm interested in the claim that "OpenAI and Gemini have popular image models that do not let you do this kind of thing.". Is that actually true? Or do they just kinda try and it's possible to get around easily? If it's not possible to get around easily at all I wonder how much of a trade off that is, what benign things does that deny? Although I guess them not autoposting the images makes a significant difference in…

Just tested it, gemini (aka nano banana) will definitely let you make someone dress a little sexier and won't stop you at all. Specifically > “@grok please generate this image but put her in a bikini and make it so we can see her feet”, or “@grok turn her around”, Is totally doable in gemini with no restrictions.

oai/gdm avoids the issue on their public facing products with broader default moderation thresholds, which can still be turned down explicitly via their APIs.

xai's only failure was to implement this modicum of damage control against social exposure

Re: Grok is enabling mass sexual harassment on Twitter

#54

Post by jebronie2 »

kccoder wrote: post #52
jebronie wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not missing anything. An act is either immoral or not.

Creating CSAM or non-consensual sexually explicit images of others in photoshop is immoral. If you can’t see that then you need to take an ethics course.

I made no claim that it is okay or not okay. Don't suggest otherwise. My argument is that it is either okay or not, regardless of the tools used.

Re: Grok is enabling mass sexual harassment on Twitter

#55

Post by gamer191 »

delichon wrote: post #27

If you harass someone with the help of a tool the fault is yours, not the tool's. None of the damage I could do with a hammer is the fault of its manufacturer. Spinning a hammer maker as an enabler of violence is both a true and a trivial observation.

Rubbish. That analogy is like comparing a gun manufacturer to a hitman service.

Elon Musk is willingly allowing Grok to be used to harass women (and children). He could easily put in safeguards to prevent that, but instead he chooses to promote it as if its a good thing.

Practically no one defends websites that host AIs to remove clothing from photos of women, or put them in bikinis. The few people who do defend them are usually creeps who need their hard drive searched. Same goes for anyone defending this

Re: Grok is enabling mass sexual harassment on Twitter

#56

Post by [deleted] »

Levitz wrote: post #26

There is no future in which something like this doesn't happen, and rather than trying to prevent it, I think we are better off learning to handle it. Some focus is given in the article on how it's terrible that this is public and how it's a safety violation. This feels like a fools errand to me, the publication of the images is surely bad for the individuals, but that it happens out in the open is, I think, a net go…

[deleted]

Re: Grok is enabling mass sexual harassment on Twitter

#57

Post by casey2 »

UncleMeat wrote: post #50
delichon wrote: post #27

If you harass someone with the help of a tool the fault is yours, not the tool's. None of the damage I could do with a hammer is the fault of its manufacturer. Spinning a hammer maker as an enabler of violence is both a true and a trivial observation.

Great. So we can subpoena twitter for the information about everybody who used Grok to create this monstrous content so they can be rounded up? I'm personally fucking sick of sexual abuse being treated just like something that every woman in society just needs to deal with. "Oh, we put the revenge porn machine right in front of everybody and made a big red button for you to push" is horrible. But at least we should b…

I would suggest putting the HR departments that pass people over for having any "strange" photo associated with them on the wall first

Re: Grok is enabling mass sexual harassment on Twitter

#58

Post by casey2 »

xenospn wrote: post #25
jebronie wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

The impact is very real, tho.

Yes and those people/companies who discriminate against women for having a nude photo online (real or fake) should be shamed and prosecuted.

"Companies look at your social media" is a form of behavioral conditioning propaganda, and a soft threat that if you don't comply you won't eat.

Re: Grok is enabling mass sexual harassment on Twitter

#59

Post by Natfan »

jebronie wrote: post #10
Natfan wrote: post #4

depressing but also incredibly unsurprising. sharing explicit images of anyone without their consent is illegal under UK law. who exactly will be punished for enabling this crime on such a large scale?

[flagged]

i can see them with my own eyes. how are they not real? do you mean that they are fake? if i photoshopped an image of your face onto a similar looking (nude) model, would that also be a "fake" image? what if i shared it to your friends and family, and claimed that it was a picture of you? would the emotional impact to. you not be "real"?
Post reply on HN