Live data from Hacker News

EFF letter to FTC on X consent order [pdf]

eff.org

81–90 of 114 posts

Re: EFF letter to FTC on X consent order [pdf]

#81
post #52
post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A problem you'd probably run into here is that it would be rather difficult to prove that no real CSAM was involved in the process of making the somehow-okay fake CSAM. Image generation models require training sets, after all. Do the companies training these models have the necessary data and evidence to prove every individual in every training image was over 18? Is generating fake CSAM okay if you trained the model…

> like an adult who looks 'too young' having their freedoms curtailed because any photos or videos would Look Like CSAM - but I don't think they're common enough harms It is extremely common in some parts of the world. Age from visual appearance basically doesn't work inter-culturally, with or without AI, and ... there are people amassing something like 1/3 of the world that look like kids until they must retire from…

>there are people amassing something like 1/3 of the world that look like kids until they must retire from all work including use of gas stoves to boil water.

What are you talking about?

Re: EFF letter to FTC on X consent order [pdf]

#82
post #79
post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Like we got so deep into the lawyered-definition of words, Perhaps try reading "your private data" again - slowly.

What do you think my comment was responding to? Literally those are the words that I was responding to. Saying that the provenance of a naked image of myself is relevant to the fact that it's a naked image of _me_ and I don't have ownership over my own image is exactly the kind of lawyer-brained wording I was referring to when I made the comment about the mirror. "It's not a picture of you, it's a picture of a reflec…

> What do you think my comment was responding to?

Your misunderstanding of "private data". This is not lawyered words.

> Saying that the provenance of a naked image of myself

It is not a naked image of yourself.

An image of someone else's naked body does not become a reflection of an image of you just because your face is pasted on it. Object if you wish, but when it comes to privacy, the only possible breach is of the privacy of the body, not the face.

> is relevant to the fact that it's a naked image of _me_ and I don't have ownership over my own image

It is not your image.

Re: EFF letter to FTC on X consent order [pdf]

#83
post #82
post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you think my comment was responding to? Literally those are the words that I was responding to. Saying that the provenance of a naked image of myself is relevant to the fact that it's a naked image of _me_ and I don't have ownership over my own image is exactly the kind of lawyer-brained wording I was referring to when I made the comment about the mirror. "It's not a picture of you, it's a picture of a reflec…

> What do you think my comment was responding to? Your misunderstanding of "private data". This is not lawyered words. > Saying that the provenance of a naked image of myself It is not a naked image of yourself. An image of someone else's naked body does not become a reflection of an image of you just because your face is pasted on it. Object if you wish, but when it comes to privacy, the only possible breach is of t…

You do, in fact, have rights over your 'likeness'. In most jurisdictions. [0]

In the US, that would fall under Prosser's Four Torts, "appropriation of name and likeness".

The law, currently, doesn't care if you think its a new image. Likeness is protected. Similarity is enough.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personality_rights

Re: EFF letter to FTC on X consent order [pdf]

#84
post #83
post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What do you think my comment was responding to? Your misunderstanding of "private data". This is not lawyered words. > Saying that the provenance of a naked image of myself It is not a naked image of yourself. An image of someone else's naked body does not become a reflection of an image of you just because your face is pasted on it. Object if you wish, but when it comes to privacy, the only possible breach is of t…

You do, in fact, have rights over your 'likeness'. In most jurisdictions. [0] In the US, that would fall under Prosser's Four Torts, "appropriation of name and likeness". The law, currently, doesn't care if you think its a new image. Likeness is protected. Similarity is enough. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personality_rights

Please don't tell me you think you have rights over the image of another's naked body because it looks similar to yours.

Re: EFF letter to FTC on X consent order [pdf]

#85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

https://www.npr.org/2026/01/16/nx-s1-5678965/elon-musks-x-to... - after weeks of mocking critics, X’s approach shifted only after investigations mounted https://thehill.com/policy/technology/5689660-xai-investigat... - musk “not aware” of any naked underage images, pushing back on concerns https://www.humanrightsresearch.org/post/a-new-form-of-gende... - musk downplays concerns and blames users and hackers

From your NPR article:

> Previously, users could ask Grok to edit images and put people into revealing clothing like bikinis.

It's because bikini photos aren't generally considered CSAM, or weren't until this year. NPR states "Musk mocks critics" but there is no evidence of him mocking CSAM concerns, and the second two documents don't mention Musk making fun of concerns at all.

From your second article:

> musk “not aware” of any naked underage images

There aren't any naked underage images. They were bikini photos as linked to from your first article: https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/grok-says-safeguard...

Re: EFF letter to FTC on X consent order [pdf]

#86
post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

It's not up to the peanut gallery to disprove easily falsifiable statements from easily found public evidence.

Do you mean that Musk not making fun of concerns is easily falsifiable, or Musk making fun of concerns is easily falsifiable? Nobody in this thread has been able to provide evidence that Musk mocked CSAM concerns.

Re: EFF letter to FTC on X consent order [pdf]

#87
post #5

> Grok AI generated large amounts of CSAM and nonconsensual intimate imagery Grok Imagine has been considerably locked down in terms of intimate imagery over the last few weeks. E.g. Harley Quinn used to be one of the easiest characters to manipulate, with or without any resemblance to Margot Robbie. No more. X still serves up explicit hardcore, and Imagine used to get at least in that neighborhood, but that has been…

The original issue was specifically to do with bikini photos - parents often upload pictures of children in bathing suits without this being considered CSAM content, so Grok (and all other AI models) weren't moderating this. Here's the original article from Reuters: https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/grok-says-safeguard...

Re: EFF letter to FTC on X consent order [pdf]

#88
post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://www.npr.org/2026/01/16/nx-s1-5678965/elon-musks-x-to... - after weeks of mocking critics, X’s approach shifted only after investigations mounted https://thehill.com/policy/technology/5689660-xai-investigat... - musk “not aware” of any naked underage images, pushing back on concerns https://www.humanrightsresearch.org/post/a-new-form-of-gende... - musk downplays concerns and blames users and hackers

From your NPR article: > Previously, users could ask Grok to edit images and put people into revealing clothing like bikinis. It's because bikini photos aren't generally considered CSAM, or weren't until this year. NPR states "Musk mocks critics" but there is no evidence of him mocking CSAM concerns, and the second two documents don't mention Musk making fun of concerns at all. From your second article: > musk “not a…

You are being intentionally obtuse. Why on earth you would feel the need to play this game when we all know Musk’s character is baffling.

Re: EFF letter to FTC on X consent order [pdf]

#89
post #52
post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A problem you'd probably run into here is that it would be rather difficult to prove that no real CSAM was involved in the process of making the somehow-okay fake CSAM. Image generation models require training sets, after all. Do the companies training these models have the necessary data and evidence to prove every individual in every training image was over 18? Is generating fake CSAM okay if you trained the model…

> like an adult who looks 'too young' having their freedoms curtailed because any photos or videos would Look Like CSAM - but I don't think they're common enough harms It is extremely common in some parts of the world. Age from visual appearance basically doesn't work inter-culturally, with or without AI, and ... there are people amassing something like 1/3 of the world that look like kids until they must retire from…

Actual porn sites have to have written records proving their models are over 18. If Grok wakes to generate porn, they can go ahead and prove that the models in their training images were of age, regardless of how they look. Nobody is suggesting to trust the AI (or anyone else) to determine the age of a person based solely on appearance.

Unless of course you're trying to argue that sexualized images of children generated by grok can't be proven to be images of children, because that's ridiculous.

Re: EFF letter to FTC on X consent order [pdf]

#90
post #84
post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You do, in fact, have rights over your 'likeness'. In most jurisdictions. [0] In the US, that would fall under Prosser's Four Torts, "appropriation of name and likeness". The law, currently, doesn't care if you think its a new image. Likeness is protected. Similarity is enough. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personality_rights

Please don't tell me you think you have rights over the image of another's naked body because it looks similar to yours.

Please don't tell me you think my own face is not my own likeness
Post reply on HN