8 ms·
Grok is enabling mass sexual harassment on Twitter
- oldpersonintx2 9mo ago[dead]
- ChrisArchitect 9mo agoRelated: Outrage as X's Grok morphs photos of women, children into explicit content https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46460880 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46460880
- Natfan 9mo agodepressing 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?
- jebronie 9mo ago[flagged]
- anonymousab 9mo agoThey are still potentially illegal in many jurisdictions.
- xenospn 9mo agoThe impact is very real, tho.
- casey2 9mo agoYes 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.
- Natfan 9mo agoi 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"?
- basisword 9mo agoThere is upcoming legislation planned for this. It will (hopefully) make the tool creators criminally liable. That’s the plan anyway. I am sure it’ll be watered down massively.
- bboygravity 9mo agoKinda like photoshop 2 decades or so ago.
- Aurornis 9mo agoNot at all like photoshop when it takes 5 seconds for anyone without any skills to do it.
- jebronie 9mo agoits either okay or not
- tokai 9mo agoNo, you are missing the aspect of distribution.
- jebronie 9mo agoI'm not missing anything. An act is either immoral or not.
- kccoder 9mo agoCreating 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.
- jebronie2 9mo agoI 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.
- deleted 9mo ago[deleted]
- 9mo ago
- jebronie 9mo ago[flagged]
- tokai 9mo agoI don't think you need to prove reputational harm. Here[0] it states that you can bring a civil suit and only need to prove that: >The defendant shared an intimate image of you without your consent, and >The defendant knew that you did not consent, or recklessly disregarded whether or not you consented. [0] https://www.justice.gov/atj/sharing-intimate-images-without-consent-know-your-rights https://www.justice.gov/atj/sharing-intimate-images-without-...
- jebronie2 9mo agoDepends what an "image of you" is then. If I draw a stick figure and label it "tokai", is that an image of you?
- bryanlarsen 9mo agoThe OP is not alleging reputational harm, they're alleging sexual harassment.
- shevy-java 9mo agoAnyone still using Twitter? Even before the AI rage, I stopped looking at it - in part because of a certain crazy techbro, but also because of the forced log-in-to-read. I am never going to log in there again, so this is now a walled-off garden to me.
- deleted 9mo ago[deleted]
- tartuffe78 9mo agoI mostly switched to Bluesky, but I still check in when "major events" happen.
- dzhiurgis 9mo agoBluesky is very dead looking at people from initial exodus. Also lots of disturbing far left content that I can’t tolerate. For X mostly seems unchanged - celebs, govs, officials, businesses are still using this as key platform. Yes there is lots of far right garbage too, but at least anti-seed oil bros don’t make me want reach for eye bleach.
- kjksf 9mo ago[flagged]
- metalcrow 9mo agoI'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 ethics!
- dfajgljsldkjag 9mo agoJust 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.
- 152334H 9mo agooai/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
- yomismoaqui 9mo agoMaybe this will be benefitial to stop the overexposure of some young people on the internet. A bad thing that brings a good result, like the inverse of "the path to hell is paved with good intentions". On the 90s we internet users tended to hide behind nicknames and posting photos of yourself was not the normal. Maybe we were more nerdy/introverted or scared about what could happen if people recognized us in the real life. Then services like Facebook, MySpace, Fotolog attracted normal users and here we are now, the more you expose yourself on the net, the better.
- gertop 9mo agoAnother explanation for the lack of faces online could be that most of us in the 90s simply didn't have an easy way of getting our photos online. Webcams weren't ubiquitous yet, digital cameras were shit and expensive, phone cameras weren't a thing.
- yomismoaqui 9mo agoTrue for the images, but users not using real names when posting on forums was the usual.
- Levitz 9mo agoThere 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 good. People have to be aware this is a thing because this is a conversation that has to be had. Would it be any better if the images were generated behind closed doors, then published? I think not.
- deleted 9mo ago[deleted]
- delichon 9mo agoIf 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.
- deleted 9mo ago[deleted]
- chojeen 9mo agoA better analogy would be "remotely swing a hammer as a service". You can't build something like that and act shocked when a significant fraction of your users use it to harm people instead of driving nails, and you certainly shoulder a large fraction of the responsibility.
- throwfaraway4 9mo agoYes except in this case you can't see who is "swinging the hammer" bc they're hiding on the internet
- pupppet 9mo agoYou're right it's not the fault of the tool, it's the fault of whomever made the tool easily accessible.
- blackbear_ 9mo agoIt is both common and uncontroversial to put restrictions on using certain tools in certain situations for safety reasons, especially in public and crowded places: you can't bring a hammer to a concert. As the provider of a public place, X ought to take certain measures to ensure public safety on its premises. Of course, deciding what is and in not tolerable is the crux of the issue, and is far from trivial.
- deleted 9mo ago[deleted]
- ubiquitysc 9mo agoI see no reason the fault can’t be both parties’ here
- brodouevencode 9mo agoWhy is this post flagged?
- sidibe 9mo agoSorry I had to flag this because it is negative about my infallible idol's company
- ummonk 9mo agoThere's a sister post with two astroturfed comments saying the same criticism of the post verbatim: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46469778 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46469778 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46469732 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46469732