5 ms·
Not the person you are responding to, but the fact that Grok is being used to generate a ton of CSAM and pornographic deepfakes isn't great!
by arrosenberg 1mo ago
Not the person you are responding to, but the fact that Grok is being used to generate a ton of CSAM and pornographic deepfakes isn't great!
- leerob 1mo ago(I work on Grok) This isn't allowed. CSAM / deepfakes are against our acceptable use policy.
- mrhottakes 1mo ago[flagged]
- toasty228 1mo agoEnforce it then
- leerob 1mo agoWe are and will continue to.
- mplewis 1mo ago[flagged]
- Planktonne 1mo agoWhy didn't you before?
- arrosenberg 1mo agoI guess we will find out if it has stopped during the litigation of numerous lawsuits against your company for doing just that.
- crustaceansoup 1mo agoYour company's owner was promoting the feature and joking about it, and called enforcement against it "fascism". CSAM generation kept up for weeks after the initial news articles, and as far as I can tell deepfake generation is still a feature. It's hard to take your AUP seriously here when you've seemingly done nothing technical to actually prevent the action.
- numpad0 1mo agoCSAM is by definition limited to real imageries and cannot be generated. "Generative CSAM" is like "false true information". The thing about criticisms that Grok generates "CSAM" images, as well as many similar claims using that acronym, are actually more likely to be intentional mislabeling intending to refer to anime images. Advocates groups with British links love to do it, supposedly to avoid having to name states and/or ethnicity associated with it. which is frustrating because this is how BS like in GP is allowed to exist. As for deepfakes... 100% they allow it, with weak plausible suggestion feature to decline it. They know that nobody will allow it if given an option. Same deal as Middle Eastern bot spams on Twitter: taking actual measures is against whatever their goals.
- vrganj 1mo ago> CSAM is by definition limited to real imageries and cannot be generated. Where in the definition does it imply this?
- Manfrednotfunny 1mo agoYeah for sure you work at Grok. Mechahitler? the lawsuite for CSAM in europe? Learn about were you work and whom you work for...
- wasfgwp 1mo agoAs funny as Mechahitler was it was more of a Microsoft Tay moment with the chatbot parroting what Twitter’s users were telling him without guardrails or a safe system prompt. It had nothing to do with grok’s or Musks pro nazi views (or lack thereof)
- Manfrednotfunny 1mo agoYes it did. Elon Musk wasn't happy that his own chatbot was to left, so they 'adjusted' grok so often until it became mechahitler.
- wasfgwp 1mo agoBut that’s not what actually happened.
- dbbk 1mo ago[flagged]
- pembrook 1mo agoSo, what do you do for a living? You've made a personal attack and seem to be under the impression you're morally superior. So, I'm curious as to what highly virtuous role you take on in your daily life. That said, I see your comment history is a lot of one sentence personal attacks against people. Not a lot of thoughtful debate. This makes hypocrisy out of your supposed concern for social good.
- slowin 1mo agoElon Musk literally went to court to protect the ability to make child porn with Grok: https://www.ag.state.mn.us/Office/Communications/2026/07/31_xAI.asp https://www.ag.state.mn.us/Office/Communications/2026/07/31_...
- brigandish 1mo agoIf it were literal then you'd be able to quote the exact part of the text that says that, but you can't because that is literally not in the page. Even Ellison, who surely would love to make that claim, is intelligent enough not to make that claim directly. A more balanced view[1] of the proceedings is available via mainstream news: > In the 38-page lawsuit, xAI — whose AI model chatbot and image generator Grok is available on the social media platform known as X, formerly Twitter, and elsewhere — said it does not contest the state’s interest in banning the distribution of AI-generated nude images of real people without their consent. But it said Minnesota’s law “extends far beyond that goal,” banning many constitutionally protected images and video and subjecting the company to a penalty of $500,000 per violation. > The lawsuit argues there is no “safe harbor” provision for companies that make good-faith efforts to prevent such images from being created by users, and that it covers images that were consented to by the depicted person, or even created by that person. > It also says the law’s definition of “intimate part” is overly broad, covering body parts that are routinely displayed in public. Calm down. [1] https://apnews.com/article/minnesota-artificial-intelligence-nudification-x-elon-musk-deepfake-131184be939d540de093b567b12c9e16 https://apnews.com/article/minnesota-artificial-intelligence...
- dd8601fn 1mo agoIs that still a thing? I assumed they would have done something about it by now.
- porridgeraisin 1mo agoYeah, that got stopped I think.
- pseudosavant 1mo ago[flagged]
- zahlman 1mo ago> So it is still going on How would you know? > Just last week they were fighting Minnesota's law that makes creating this stuff illegal. What law, and what evidence of fighting; and what evidence that their motivation has anything to do with what you allege?
- pseudosavant 1mo agohttps://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49105411 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49105411 Nice semi-colon. Written by AI?
- imagent 1mo ago> Nice semi-colon. Written by AI? Damn I'm going to have to update my personal style again to stay ahead of the AI police (My meta point is that people are altering their personal writing styles to avoid sounding like AI)
- zahlman 1mo ago> Nice semi-colon. Thanks. I've been using them literally for decades. This one is a deliberate stylistic alteration, where a comma would have been the obvious choice, intended to suggest a specific speaking cadence. Your source directly refutes your argument: > In the 38-page lawsuit, xAI — whose AI model chatbot and image generator Grok is available on the social media platform known as X, formerly Twitter, and elsewhere — said it does not contest the state’s interest in banning the distribution of AI-generated nude images of real people without their consent. But it said Minnesota’s law “extends far beyond that goal,” banning many constitutionally protected images and video and subjecting the company to a penalty of $500,000 per violation.
- cheesecakegood 1mo agoIt’s pretty telling that almost all of the bullet points in the system prompt that was posted for Grok have to do with preventing criminality and CSAM generation. No other provider has this same issue at that scale. The first-order-thinking reaction is “oh cool, look how they don’t want it to happen” but the second-order reaction is “why does this company have such a problem when others don’t?” It’s their own tactics. If you want the “good” of 4chan-like behavior, turns out you get the bad too.