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

Post by misnome » Wed, Feb 04, 2026, 2:56 PM UTC

tw85 wrote: post #831

mnewme wrote: post #519

Good one. No platform ever should allow CSAM content. And the fact that they didn’t even care and haven’t want to spend money for implementing guardrails or moderation is deeply concerning. This has imho nothing to do with model censorship, but everything with allowing that kind of content on a platform

It seems people have a rather short memory when it comes to twitter. When it was still run by Jack Dorsey, CP was abundant on twitter and there was little effort to tamp down on it. After Musk bought the platform, he and Dorsey had a public argument in which Dorsey denied the scale of the problem or that old twitter was aware of it and had shown indifference. But Musk actually did take tangible steps to clean it up a…

Post by psychoslave » Wed, Feb 04, 2026, 3:02 PM UTC

direwolf20 wrote: post #371

tokai wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In what world is generating CSAM a speech issue? Its really doing a disservice to actual free speech issues to frame it was such.

if pictures are speech, then either CSAM is speech, or you have to justify an exception to the general rule. CSAM is banned speech.

Post by BigTTYGothGF » Wed, Feb 04, 2026, 3:09 PM UTC

sandworm101 wrote: post #827

beAbU wrote: post #583

Earlier 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.

>> or store sexually explicit material that represents a real person without their consent Who told you that? Go ask Pamela Anderson or Paris Hilton about that one. There are rules about material created without consent, but people do not retain a perpetual right to have formerly consentual material taken down. Hollywood, let alone the porn industry, would collapse overnight if every disgruntled star could have movie…

Post by pfraze » Wed, Feb 04, 2026, 3:12 PM UTC

gadders wrote: post #800

direwolf20 wrote: post #776

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why didn't they do this until X started publishing naked little kids?

[flagged]

Post by master-lincoln » Wed, Feb 04, 2026, 3:13 PM UTC

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #823

master-lincoln wrote: post #692

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

I don't think one internet commenter can know or decide what is or isn't "morally reprehensible" in "most of the world". I don't speak for "most of the world" but I'm fairly sure "I drew nudes of your mom lol" will not go down well anywhere.