[flagged]
At my kids school the children have been using grok to create pics of other children without clothes on - chatgpt etc won’t let you do that - grok needs some controls and x seem unable to do that themselves.
[deleted]
X offices raided in France as UK opens fresh investigation into Grok
771–780 of 1001 posts
Re: X offices raided in France as UK opens fresh investigation into Grok
#772Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, if you don't follow EU laws prepare to not do business in Europe. Likewise, if you don't follow US laws I'd advise against trying to do business in USA.
If X/Twitter was to be banned in the EU, and some of its citizens still wanted to access X/Twitter, let us say for the sake of getting alternative points of view on politics and news, would it be a good or a bad thing if accessing X/Twitter by IP was stopped? As in, a citizen of an EU country types x.com/CNN, because he or she wants to know the other side of some political issue between the EU and the USA, and he or…
there's a push to end with VPNs in the UK and in the EU because it's clear that this is a very plausible endgame
currently VPNs are too easy to use for the leadership of autocracies like the EU or the UK to be comfortable with them, so at the very least they will require for backdoors to see which citizens are watching what, and have them visited by fellows in hi-vis jackets
Re: X offices raided in France as UK opens fresh investigation into Grok
#773Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
> How about "R-Rated" violence like we see in popular movies? Movie ratings are a good example of a system for restricting who sees unacceptable content, yes.
More to the point, now that most productions are using intimacy coordinators, there's a degree of certainty around the consent of R-rated images.
There's basically no consent with what Grok is doing.
Re: X offices raided in France as UK opens fresh investigation into Grok
#774Re: X offices raided in France as UK opens fresh investigation into Grok
#775Earlier quoted context omitted.
What does it say? I can't read French
Going from the BBC: Among potential crimes it said it would investigate were complicity in possession or organised distribution of images of children of a pornographic nature, infringement of people's image rights with sexual deepfakes and fraudulent data extraction by an organised group.
Distribution of images of children of a pornographic nature sounds like child porn to me. CSAM is a woker word for child porn.
Re: X offices raided in France as UK opens fresh investigation into Grok
#776Re: X offices raided in France as UK opens fresh investigation into Grok
#777To people claiming a physical raid is pointless from the point of gathering data : - you are thinking about a company doing good things the right way. You are thinking about a company abiding by the law, storing data on its own server, having good practices, etc. The moment a company starts to do dubious stuff then good practices start to go out the window. People write email with cryptic analogies, people start dele…
It's also just very basic police work. We're investigating this company, we think they've committed a crime. Ok, why do you think that. Well they've very publicly and obviously committed a crime. Ok, are you going to prosecute them? Probably. Have you gone to their offices and gathered evidence? No thanks. Of course they're going to raid their offices! They're investigating a crime! It would be quite literally insane…
that's kinda the normalization argument, not the reason behind it
"it is done because it's always done so"
Re: X offices raided in France as UK opens fresh investigation into Grok
#778Earlier quoted context omitted.
If there is a glut of legal, AI generated CSAM material then this provides a lot of deniability for criminal creators/spreaders that cause genuine harm, and reduces "vigilance" of prosecutors, too ("it's probably just AI generated anyway..."). You could make a multitude of arguments against that perspective, but at least there is a conclusive reason for legal restrictions. > What is the criteria for this? My criteria…
> You could make a multitude of arguments against that perspective, but at least there is a conclusive reason for legal restrictions. But that reason is highly problematic. Laws should be able to stand on their own for their reasons. Saying 'this makes enforcement of other laws harder' does not do that. You could use the same reasoning against encryption. > You could make the same argument that a hidden camera in a l…
> Saying 'this makes enforcement of other laws harder' does not do that. You could use the same reasoning against encryption.
Yes. I almost completely agree with your outlook, but I think that many of our laws trade such individual freedoms for better society-wide outcomes, and those are often good tradeoffs.
Just consider gun legislation, driving licenses, KYC laws in finance, etc: Should the state have any business interfering there? I'd argue in isolation (ideally) not; but all those lead to huge gains for society, making it much less likely to be murdered by intoxicated drivers (or machine-gunners) and limit fraud, crime and corruption.
So even if laws look kinda bad from a purely theoretical-ethics point of view it's still important to look at the actual effects that they have before dismissing them as unjust in my view.
Re: X offices raided in France as UK opens fresh investigation into Grok
#779Until the EU gets their act together on free speech, it's high time the united states hits them with aggressive economic sanctions.
Re: X offices raided in France as UK opens fresh investigation into Grok
#780Earlier quoted context omitted.
It has always been illegal and morally reprehensible to create, own, distribute or store sexually explicit material that represents a real person without their consent, regardless if they are underage or not. Grok is a platform that is enabling this en masse. If xAI can't bring in guardrails or limit who can access these capabilities, then they deserve what's coming to them.
In which broken society do you live where this is true? I would say drawing sexually explicit pictures of real persons without their consent and keeping them in your drawer is neither illegal nor morally reprehensible in most of the world. I am with you on publishing these...
Not morally reprehensible? Do you tell your coworkers “hey, last night I sketched you nude, but it’s cool, it’s in my bedside drawer…”